UnitedFFinAsia

Happy 4th of July Weekend Everyone:

We all know that many of United's Aircraft while generally clean are getting a bit tired looking. Many people recently have been complaining about the UA 747's interior cabins and problems. While there are mixed opinions about flying the 757 due to the good chances of an UG but poor conditions of the plane interior many FTers seem pretty happy with the 777s that do mainly International routes. As for the remaining 767-300's the jury seems to be out from what I have read. So with Ted eating up what seems to be more and more A320's and the many FT'ers dislike the A 319 and the old 737's because of the lack of available UG space I was wondering:
:-: What planes you like in United's fleet or would you like to see in United's fleet?
:-: Would you like to see UA as an all AirBus customer or an all Boeing Customer or are you happy with United's current mix of both?

In asking these questions I only care about Main Line UA not UX or TED.

Now before I get flamed I know that there are a lot of different threads out there with various different information related to this topic and I am not one to start many new threads but after searching and reading through lots of them for the past hour I do have a few questions that I want to ask everyone on FT in addition to the questions listed above:
:-: I would just like an update on what planes you like or dislike in United's Current Fleet and why?
:-: I would also like to know what plane or planes you hope to see or don't want to see in UA's future and why?

If you have started your own thread(s) relating to this topic by all means please post a link so that FT'ers can not only vote here but easily read the past opinions from other members and related material from previous posts and threads.

As for my opinion:

Current UA Planes I like:
B777, A320
--777- I like it for smooth comfortable ride and IFE in Y and having 2-5-2 most of the time when I travel alone (Dislike only it if I get stuck in E- in the middle seat on a misconnect )
--A320- Given the choice for UA's smaller planes the A320 is my favorite especially now that UA uses them on Transcon as they have 12 F seats.

Current Planes I like and dislike:
B757, B747, A319, 767
--B757- I only like it for the Good chance of UG's unlike US's reconfigured 757 but I dislike the poor (OLD) conditions of the planes, No IFE, and crowded feel.
--A319- is not a bad plane but using this to fly from SFO to PHL after connecting from PVG means I usually sweat out the UG almost everytime.
--B767- Have nice IFE in Y and pretty good F and C on the Int'l version but the planes arew very old and tired looking in many cases.
--B747- is my favorite plane to fly on especially if I am lucky enough to get UG from Y to C ^ but I really dislike the fact that UA decided not to put PTV in Y class.

Current UA Planes I dislike:
B737
--B737's are pretty old and tired NTM they have no IFE which stinks on 4 hour trips.

Planes I hope to see in UA's future:
B747 ADV, B787, New B777's, New B737 or A320s

Plane I hope I never see in UA's Fleet
(Or have to fly on any carrier especially in China ):
A380 (I know there will some disagreement on this one.)

As for Boeing vs AirBus
I generally like Boeing Planes (747,777) better as they seem better built and rattle less during takeoff (A330/A340). Although A319/320, A330, A340 can be pretty nice if outfitted well although it seems as if the general opinion on FT is that the similar (new) Boeing Models offer superior performance. I dont like the A300 at all and it should be retired just as the 727/757 have been. I just hope UA sticks with Boeing in the future and doesnt "try" the A380.

As for the Future UA Fleet I hope to see the following (Not clearly outlined in OP):
--B747/747 Adv- For the High Density Routes and to replace current 747's
--B777- This is a great plane and I hope UA adds it to supplement its current fleet of 777's and to add new lucrative routes.
--B787- I hope this plane replaces all current B757/B767's in service and that the Super Long Range Version will allow UA to fly some new exciting routes!
--B737/A320- When it comes time to replace the old 737's I hope UA chooses the newest 737's or an A320 for all routes.
--NO RJ's- For Mainline UA I don't want to see any RJ's. RJ's are fine for the UX Brand and TED A320's are OK for leisure destinations (4 F Seats Would be acceptable on TED for SALE, those with F or C connections or UG's confirmed only during the current 120-100-72-48-24 Window.) I know I might get flamed for this addition as well.

To all the FT community flying this Holiday weekend have a safe, happy, and hopefully on-time trip.
I look forward to everyone's opinions!!

-UFFA

warreng24

I personally love the 777 as far as the IFE and technology used in the plane. However, I can't stand UA's seating arrangement in Y for it. The 2-5-2 is HORRIBLE. I wish they would go for the 3-3-3 route. I believe that would help to improve customer satisfaction on these aircraft.

I just don't like middle seats, and I cringe at the fact of ever being stuck in D, E or F on a 777.

The 767 are great. Their 2-3-2 give a nice roomy feeling. I just wish an upgrade of the IFE could be done.

The 757's take too darn long to load! And, I always hate the scramble that occurs because of the single asile. Maybe it would help if UA could attach two jetways, possibly WN style with one attached to the rear and one at the front? This would help loading the plane, so two doors could be used.

UA just needs to retire the ex-Shuttle planes. Or simple confine them to trip durations of 2 hours or less. The fact is simple. There are not enough bathrooms available on those plans for passengers in Y to use.

Replacing them with the 737-800's would be a good thing.
Un-retiring the 727's to replace only the 737 Shuttle planes would also be a good thing.

The 747's are great aircraft. I like how UA only flies the 744. But, I wish they were a bit more thorough on the MX of these birds, given the horror stories posted here on FT.

I won't speak of the Airbusii, because as a part of the Boeing employee family, that company in Europe doesn't exist.

UNITED959

One of the reasons I choose UA is because of their fleet.

I'm happy with what they have. The biggest factor is that everything in my seat works as intended. Whether that seat is on a 772 or 773 or 744 or 747ADV has little bearing...but I do prefer Boeing equipment over Scarebus as it flies faster, looks better, and seems to be a superior product. I also have my own thoughts regarding their shady funding for the A380 project.

In the interest of streamlining UA's fleet, I'd like to see:

772ER for N.A. > Euro
773ER for N.A. > Japan/Pac Routes
772LR for N.A. > Australia & Hong Kong & India
747ADV > just to have some 747s in the fleet because they look cool

787 for transcons, ORD-West Coast, South America, low density Euro routes

737NGs and keep up the 757s doing medium-range routes

EMB170 for shorter routes

**Don't even think about A330, A340, or the blasted A380.

dcgators

NOTE: Since we are giving advice, please consider switching the F seats in domestic 2-cabin aircrafts with the international C seats for flights longer than 3 hours (i.e. all transcons and Hawaii).

KEEP:
B747: please work on refurbishing these (I once saw duct tape on the ceiling over my bulkhead seat in C) or get new generation version. This is a great plane for any transpac and transat international hub.

B777: good second choice for transpac and transat international point-to-point. also for South American hub service. Good transcon plane in 2-cabin config, especially if they outfit the F Cabin with international C seats.

A320: I like this plane on domestic service less than 3.5 hours. Outfitted with internnational C seats in the F cabin, I would gladly take it for transcons.

A319: keep it but make it replace the B737, i.e. please keep the flights under 2.5 hours. I do not think it makes a good transcon plane.

LOSE:
B757: worst UA flight ever on this plane in F cabin on a recent redeye from SEA to IAD. Filthy (walls, carpet, bulkhead), smelly (urine), nasty cabin. Horrible F seats (please consider this my official harping for international C seats on any flight over 3 hours and especially on transcons). I don't like that plane at all (and I know a lot of FT swear by this one for rows 8 and 9). If they stay in UA's fleet (and I mean IF), major refurb is required and please switch to international C seats in F-cabin. Use exclusively for p.s. and other transcon n/s service (although I prefer B777 for this). Also for domestic hub-to-hub service.

B767: I am torn on this one. I hate to get rid of a dual-aisle plane. But I think that these are just too close to the B777-200. Maybe use these to replace the B757 for p.s. service?

B737: 1 word: Southwest.. Nuff said.

ADD: Here, I agree with UnitedFFinAsia, except for the B737.
B787: great for international point-to-point or international with hub stopover (i.e. AMS-IAD-PVG).
B747 ADV
New B777
New A320

The only use I could ever see for the A380 and UA is at LHR and maybe FRA. Is is worth adding this aircraft with the additional cost of training and certifying pilots and maintenance crews? I am not entirely sold on this.

That being said, I can't wait to try it out with SQ. Reminds me of being a child and how I felt when I first laid eyes and set foot on THE Jumbo Jet. Can't take that memory away ...

travelnutz

A330 or newer airbus planes. United should follow NW in acquiring new planes. Then they wouldn't have so many delays caused by mechanical failures.

brahms77

Too many posting for a day... this should be my last for the day

I would like to let you know that one of the reasons (besides its FF friendly MP program) I fly UA is because of their diverse fleet. I get to fly from B737 to A320 and B757 to B747 on one round trip to Asia, of course with good routing and planning. Enough said.

Current fleet I try to avoid when flying UA:
I try to avoid B733 B735s nowadays and prefer the buses over them when flying shorter routes (BOS-ORD). If B757 is available for BOS-ORD or PVD-ORD, I take that flight over other flights.

B767 transcon was great, but with P.S. commencing nowadays and BOS-SFO being on 757, I usually look for a connection in ORD to fly B777 or B767 with international configuration. I flew B767 to HNL once in F and it was not so good.

B747 (when flying in Economy class). When flying in C, upperdeck is great! but in Economy, it sucks... and let's not mention mechanical failures we've had to go through with the jumbos.

Future fleet line up I would like to see:

Okay, as much as I like diversity, I think consolidating the fleet into one aircraft manufacturer is generally accepted as a good idea. With B737NG being more comfortable and efficient (and more flyer friendly) than its predecessor, I would like to see B737NG in the UA line up.

With B757 gone, UA should seek to implement B787 into its fleet and routes and incorporate different versions of B787 in appropriate routes.

I would not like to see A380 as I don't see any justification for UA flying this plane... unless they want to consolidate some frequencies out of ORD and SFO to NRT, but I don't think this would work for UA nor its fliers.

So, the line up:

B747 ADV (for transpac routes with heavy load)
B773 ER (for transpac and atlantic routes with heavy load)
B772 LR (may not be suitable, but perhaps non-stop JFK to SYD or JFK to SIN or BKK).
B772 ER (for transpac and atlantic routes and some hawaiian routes from east coast and ORD)
B787-3 (some routes that needs B757 + capacity that some frequencies can be consolidated, transcon flights btw BOS, JFK, IAD and ORD to SFO and LAX.. may be expanding to SEA).
B787-8 (some European and Asian routes that are smaller markets and does not require B772 ER): These may include ORD-ICN, JFK-ICN (I know OZ and KE have big planes for these routes, but for UA, it could get smaller share of the market and profit), BOS/IAD-ICN,NRT,PEK. SFO-SIN,KUL, Ho chih minh.
B737NG (mostly 700 and 800 series). 900X could be used to replace some B757 markets like PVD or BOS from ORD.

Lastly, I would like to see UA recover from CH11 like they say they will and install new C and Y seats in their old/new/future planes. This would also mean that UA will have to incorporate a decent IFE that everyone would enjoy.... Doesn't have to be like SQ but something that can please everyone's flights.

izzik

I know this sounds funny but I would like to see United replace all of their regional aircraft with CRJ700's.. and make the economy section all E+. Basically turn it into a comfortable plane with a first class section (for those that need it).. and then it would be great for short and medium-haul routes that don't attract enough traffic for the mainliners.

I also hope United never gives up the 747. It's just way too cool.

SealBeach

I think the 737s would be far more appealing if they had the Recaro seats from the 319s/320s and other UA aircraft. I'd much rather fly a UA 737 with Recaro seats than a NW 320 without them (and that's not even taking E+ into consideration).

Airlines can work wonders with refurbished interiors to lure passengers. Continental had great success doing this when they first came out of bankruptcy and needed to put a fresh face on planes, as did NW when they refurbished their DC9s (although I'll admit that NW DC9 interiors are irritating to me now that all the foam has deteriorated in their seats).

And speaking of seats, am I the only one who just can't get comfortable in UA's C seats or F seats on 2-class planes? I appreciate the extra width, but I just find the proportions of the seat cushion (too big front-to-back), length of the leg rest (not long enough for my legs when fully extended), and head rest are just weird. FWIW I'm 6'2" and about 200 lbs...

exerda

EMB-170's and 190's would be preferable to me over CR7's. Same seat config you described, but less of that "tiny tube in the sky" feel to the planes.

kdinino

Agreed. EMB-190's would be a huge upgrade from a RJ on smaller routes and they could get a nice biz travel mix w/ a FC cabin on these planes.

izzik

Perhaps a mix of both? EMB170s don't have an emergency exit row of seats, which is a nice haven from children.

SEA_Tigger

My perfect UA fleet would be the:

• 777-300ER for long-range high-density international routes.
• 777-200LR for ultra-long-range high-density international routes.
• 777-200ER for long-range high-density international routes.
• 787-8 for ultra long-range low-density international routes.
• 787-3 for high-density transcon, mid-con and Hawaii routes.
• A320/A319 for low density trans-con and mid-con routes.
• Embraer 170 to 195s for regional services.

So...

• I'd get rid of the 744s and replace them with 773ERs and 772LRs.
• I'd get rid of all the 777XC (non-ER) so I could use a 772 anywhere.
• I'd replace the 767MZ/767MD/777XA with the 787-8.
• I'd replace the 757s with the 787-3s.
• I'd replace the 737s with a mix of Airbus and Embraer equipment.

Kurt

I also dislike the 737s but to say that they have "no IFE" is incorrect. UA's 737s have audio entertainment (and Channel 9), which is a form of IFE or "In-Flight Entertainment." There is not video entertainment. The statement "AA's MD-80s have no IFE" is correct

CApreppie

Well now I don't even have to come up with my own list, SEA_Tigger already did such a great job.

I think UA should definitely slim down the variety of aircraft it has. It just has too many models and configurations, which is costly and confusing. Dump the aging 744s, 767s, and 737s. As much as I'd like to see an all Boeing fleet, UA invested in the reliable A320 and A319 and they should stick to them until it comes time to replace them. Now that Boeing has increased the range and capacity of the 777 line, I think UA should go with this proven and popular international workhorse. The 787s are a given to replace the 767s and UA will/should follow all the other carriers in doing this.

My question regarding a 787-300 replacing the 757-200 is that the 783 two-cabin passenger capacity is much higher than a two-cabin 752, ~269 vs ~200 (according to Boeing). Is the 783 that much more efficient than a 752 that it could fly, for example, with 69 empty seats and the cost of operating it is the same or less than a 752? I'd love to see UA get rid of the 752 is UA could win on lower costs on a 783.

TJQuill

Concorde. How cool would that be?

TJ
_______________________
Join the FlyerTalk folding at home team - the life you save could be your own.
FlyerTalk Folding@home