If you look at my posting history, you will see that I have been among the most tireless advocates of something like E+ on CO.

And so I am hardly "rooting" for E+ to go away...

But...

The reason so many of us believe it will go is we know the way CO thinks. They have a formula that tells them they only make money on the last coach passenger in the plane. So given that analysis, the last thing they would ever want to do is get rid of coach seats.

Also, they strongly believe (and here there is probably a point), that something like E+ acts as a disincentive to shoot for FC or higher elite status.

I believe, sadly, that E+ will be removed but that the new airline will continue to monetize the remaining handful of seats (exit rows, certain bulkheads) on each a/c that have extra legroom (i.e. ELR).

As far as the A-319's/320's, they obviously keep the exit row seats the way they are (there isn't much of a choice there). They would thus remove one row of E+ ahead of the exit rows, tighten the remaining rows so they have 31" seat pitch and easily add a row of FC.

They would also get rid of E+ on their non P.S. 752's, but since they already have 24 FC seats, this would not change as a function of not having too large a premium cabin and the location of the 2nd set of doors/lavatory.

One More Thing...
 

I forgot to address what happens to US P.S.

Althought UA claims these are their most profitable routes, the entire notion of a P.S. service is so anathema to the CO management philosophy, that retaining it will be a huge test of Smisek's decade of experience at CO.

I wonder how many of you think UaCo would actually get rid of P.S. based on the traditional CO business metrics, even if they are truly as profitable as UA claims?

The 75s are relatively young and a huge part of the combined fleet. No way they are gone in the next 10 years, much less 3-5. There is no way to replace that lift that quickly. The 744s/762s will depends quite a bit on the delivery pace of the 787s. But unless things pick up speed very quickly with Boeing I'd bet that 3-5 years is too quick on that front as well.
No way. AA just announced that they're switching to the free+premium model starting October 1. Choosing to go cash-only at the bar would put UACO at a rather notable competitive disadvantage compared to AA, DL, US and AS.

Remember also that it's very likely that the revenue picture of the UA network is stronger than what CO has been accustomed to. After all, UA has higher RASM than CO does.

So it's possible that CO's usual fixations (e.g., fleet efficiency, standardization, etc.), while important, may be less so in the combined entity. Sure a 744 is a gas guzzler, but if it's sustainable, until you get enough planes, might as well keep it going. Remember, UA recently pulled a 744 out of the desert just to serve SFO-ORD-SFO daily. They wouldn't have done it had it not made sense.

While I'm sure CO would love to use their cookie-cutter approach to the combined carrier, it's very possible that they may relent once they see some numbers. Int'l F, for example, may be a big deal to maintain, but if they have enough customers paying for it, it may be worthwhile keeping it in premium markets.

I have taken several PS flights this year. It is a very nice product ^ and quite superior when compared to the high cost E- CO service ex. EWR. :td:

UA needs the premium F and J seats from the NYC market to feed high rev passengers to/from their west coast Asia routes. As for the E+ portion of the plane is beats the competition (AA, DL, B6, VX) on the highly competitive JFK transcon routes.


SunLover

I agree the 777s/787s will eventually become the longhaul mainstays, but what kind of time frame are you talking here? Five years, ten years, or more? I think the 744 will be around until at least the end of the decade.

If you got em' you might as well fly em'... :)


SunLover

I'm highly confident Economy Plus will be featured on the combined fleet...and equally confident that the Economy Plus section will shrink somewhat from current proportions.

In what way did I imply that was not the case? It was UA management that announced an eventual end to 744 service when they noted their intention to purchase A350s. Maybe those convert to 748i orders so the new company keeps its Boeing focus but no way to know today.

Wow...really going out on a limb there, huh? Yes, if something is profitable then the company will continue to offer it. Hardly a stretch, even for the conservative folks running CO.
The problem at EWR is runway throughput capacity, not terminal capacity.
B6 is a stronger product than p.s. E+.

I hope you are right, and that as it shrinks from current proportions it doesn't simply turn into CO's current ELR scheme...

One critical issue for UaCo at EWR will be the outcome of the scope clause issue...

If UaCo can raise it to current UA levels, then this could substantially reduce flight volume at EWR as ERJ-145's are replaced by the larger CRJ-700's and ERJ-170's...

Of course, that's assuming EWR continues to be as major a hub as it is now...the combined airline could easily decide to make IAD the principal TATL gateway and relegate EWR to O&D traffic which, coming out of the NYC metro area, will continue to be major.

My predictions.
747's go. Non ER 777's go. Int' first cut back except for Asia (general world wide trend is the elimination of first except for a few airlines that do it well) Many of UA 757's go away because of age. All other 757's stay around as their is a need and there isn't a replacment aircraft out there that can do what the 757 can do. PS goes away. LiveTV added to UA domestic fleet. Interiors go with CO layout but adventually new fabric.

EWR won't change. It has a very high O&D TATL traffic, it's "New York" after all. Overall O&D is around 65% which is high for a hub and being the 2nd largest hub in the new United, it's not going anywhere.

I think there is a very good chance that, to alleviate the tremendous pressure put on EWR's limited runways, many of the feeder flights would be cancelled and re-routed to IAD.

EWR would clearly retain a prominent position in the network, no question about that, but it could end up primarily as an O&D hub with many or most of the connecting flights routed through IAD...

If this scenario is even plausible, I think we would see a major reduction in the number of CoEx flights to cities along the Eastern Seaboard and the eastern Midwest.

UA Domestic Wide Bodies?
 

Another issue:

UA has a fleet of wide bodies (763 & 777US) that are configured to fly domestically, with domestic-style FC and Y cabins,

Does the new UaCo retain this sub-fleet, do they convert them to the international configurations, or do they convert them to a modified international configuration, something like CO's current 76H?

I think those will disappear. I don't think they are ER versions so they don't have the legs to go long distances like CO's 764's

Aircraft usage will be interesting since the two airlines have no two aircraft that are the same. Even the 757's and 777 are different because of the different engines. Part of the attraction of the ATA 753's to CO was they used Rolls Royce engines like the CO purchased 753s.