Thats what I thought when I saw the UA news. I am going to ADL via MEL today because theres no non-stop. Sigh.

TBF though, its not like QF is flying ADL-HKG so CX doesn't really have an incentive to compete. SQ and MH are there but ADL-MEL-HKG is going to be one-stop too and I guess they don't think connecting traffic is worth very much.

TG and VN are already on those and if you weren't going to fly TG or VN instead of CX, you aren't going to fly UA instead of CX...

There are price-sensitive HKers who may opt for a Western brand that costs less than CX.

But the bigger competition for CX on those routes may be connecting passengers from LA or SF (or Newark if United ever gets that going) choosing them for either price or a US brand or both.

UA sends a polaris B789 compared to CX A330 and the vietnam carriers rather bad recliners, so they actually have the best product in the route. meanwhile HKG- BKK has THREE fifth freedom carriers now.

CX is certainly going to be hurt hardly by the tariffs, as it gains a lot of revenue/ cargo/ transit pax from the US, especially the east coast, and with less people visiting it might actually affect profits a lot. same goes for BA/ LH / VS etc. who focus mostly on transatlantic flights. on the bright side, other new routes can open up because of this.

UA REALLY likes hong kong it seems (6 daily departures!!), or maybe these routes are used to compete more with CX and improve load factors, considering CX seems to be snatching all the passengers with better product (load factor to LAX/ SFO around 80% at the moment)

CX seems quite willing to cede SFO and, to a lesser extent, LAX to UA, in exchange for its monopolies in BOS, DFW, NYC, and ORD.

Curious if UA's extension to BKK and SGN utilizes the spare time the planes would otherwise sit in HKG after arriving from the US and before returning home?

CX is back to their pre pandemic levels on the SFO-HKG. They will be offering 3 daily flights from SFO next month.

Currently, no, as all 4 LAX and SFO turn around immediately. I would expect the flights to be retimed to accomodate the additional legs.

The UA schedule is here. I will say the leg to SGN, in terms of schedule, is not very competitive…

https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/250403-uanw25as
Hong Kong – Bangkok Suvarnabhumi eff 26OCT25 1 daily 787-9 (Bangkok overall last served until March 2014. UA previously served this sector from April 1987 to April 1990 and from December 1998 to February 2000)
UA822 HKG0900 – 1050BKK 789 D
UA821 BKK1640 – 2045HKG 789 D

Hong Kong – Ho Chi Minh Cityeff 26OCT25 1 daily 787-9 (Last served until October 2016)
UA152 HKG2115 – 2255SGN 789 D
UA153 SGN0600 – 0935HKG 789 D

Timed for both the United connection and to arrive in HKG from SGN before the workday and leave after dinner...or fly to SGN after dinner the night before and arrive back in HKG before a workday.

There used to be more in the years leading up to the pandemic. KQ, RJ and MS all used to fly HKG-BKK if i'm not mistaken.

The flights are still not for sale.
The timing would be weird if those flights were operated by a separate , or even the same ac from SFO/LAX.
From HKG UA would need a new crew. Typically the same crew would operate HKG-BKK-HKG. But that would not be possible with those schedules.

SFO should be a very lucrative market given the wealth in Bay Area and close connections with Asia. UA is pushing for some good competition I hope.

United have mentioned that it will operate LAX-HKG-BKK n LAX-HKG-SGN. Flight will be retimed if approval is given.

these flight timing are more convenient for the paxes to travel From BKK/SGN to USA and vice versa with short connections time in HKG.

as for the crew, most likely crew will rest at HKG (1 1/2 days or 2) BKK or SGN (1 day) HKG (1 day)


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...209d8bbda8.png

Iirc, the last time UA flew HKG-SGN, load factors on that segment were abominable. Even if the flight times are slightly better this time, I can't imagine there will be many takers (i.e. I'd even pick UO over a fifth freedom tag on UA).

I guess my question is why? :p

Additionally, I don't think the HKG-SGN route is marketed towards those ex-HKG, those timings are horrendous. Plus the old HKG-SGN was later served with a 737NG even though it was marketed as a continuation of the widebody UA117 service from EWR.

The new flight on the same 789 as a continuation to/fro LAX closes a market gap - SGN only has direct services to SFO on VN right now, and there's a sizeable (South) Vietnamese diaspora in SoCal not served which UA152/153 will now do.