Status of United's 787 Fleet

Old Apr 10, 13, 5:38 am
  #1051  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.5MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 20,406
Originally Posted by uastarflyer View Post
Anyone else notice April's CEO letter in Hemispheres concerns Earth Day and the environment and in there ZERO mention of the 787 by name?
Same reason why $misek is now talking about IAH construction (with hard hat!) on the pre-safety videos now instead.

GE ads w/the UA 787 are still running though...funny.
UA-NYC is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 11:30 am
  #1052  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SEA
Programs: Million Miles achieved | 2017 Delta Platinum, United NADA, Global Entry, PreCheck, NEXUS
Posts: 1,290
Originally Posted by BF263533 View Post
When you squeezzzzzzzzzzzzeeeeeeee in 9 across in coach, you save fuel. That is a wonderful technological development. How fuel efficient is the plane at 8 across, and if it so fuel efficient, why is not 8 across being used?
If I recall correctly, the ANA 787 is 8 across with wider seat and individual armrests. So...
Bear4Asian is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 11:33 am
  #1053  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SEA
Programs: Million Miles achieved | 2017 Delta Platinum, United NADA, Global Entry, PreCheck, NEXUS
Posts: 1,290
Originally Posted by craz View Post
I agree but you will find this with almost any carrier, Take EK almost everyone sings their Praises for EK, but dont they push 10 across on their 777s in Y? Its fine on a 747 or A380 where theres width in the cabin but on a 777 no way

At least PMCO was 3-3-3 on its 777 while PMUA was 2-5-2 so theres good and bad to all
+1

I agree on the UA 777. And I try to take them (either config.) on my flights to Asia. Seats are wider and aisle armrest go up. That's a big plus for wide body people.
Bear4Asian is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 11:43 am
  #1054  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: OMA
Programs: UA
Posts: 293
Originally Posted by seagar View Post
I thought I read somewhere recently that while the approval might come by the date UAL suggests, it will be a number of months before it will be approved for TPAC???
There was talk of ETOPS restrictions upon entry into service. That said even if they limit the 787 to 120 or 138 minutes, that doesn't really effect a route like LAX-NRT or LAX-PVG. IAH-LOS would need ETOPS-180 to operate.

Last edited by Mr.Nuke; Apr 10, 13 at 11:52 am
Mr.Nuke is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 11:56 am
  #1055  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 23,375
Originally Posted by Mr.Nuke View Post
There was talk of ETOPS restrictions upon entry into service. That said even if they limit the 787 to 120 or 138 minutes, that doesn't really effect a route like LAX-NRT or LAX-PVG. IAH-LOS would need ETOPS-180 to operate.
? Ok it flys via Alaska/Russia but once you pass ANC when is the next closest airport. Its not only not being over the water but its ability to land somewhere as well

Nor do I think the FAA will say OK it can fly Intl on these Routes only, I think it will be an All or Nothing , with Nothing being the winner for now
craz is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 11:59 am
  #1056  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 69,213
Originally Posted by Mr.Nuke View Post
There was talk of ETOPS restrictions upon entry into service. That said even if they limit the 787 to 120 or 138 minutes, that doesn't really effect a route like LAX-NRT or LAX-PVG.
Yes, it does.

While the plane could technically fly the route at ETOPS 120 the most efficient routing eastbound rarely is that close to the great circle path. They need the full ETOPS rating for the route to work correctly.
sbm12 is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 12:06 pm
  #1057  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Australia
Programs: SQ & QF
Posts: 1,300
Originally Posted by EWR764 View Post
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/04...y-flight-test/

We are quite a bit closer to FAA approval now, though. Most observers expect the regulators to be satisfied with Boeing's fix.

The big question will be whether they can get the aircraft retrofit in time once approval is gained. All 60+ 787s built or delivered need the modifications, which will take a few days per airplane to carry out.
There are a grand total of 50 with airlines. I should imagine some have been retrofitted already.
FN-GM is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 12:29 pm
  #1058  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Midwest
Programs: Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 261
Originally Posted by chinatraderjmr View Post
Saves fuel? Show me where operators of the 787 are offering refunds on fuel surcharges to passengers taking those flights & ill be excited but what do I care if UA saves a little fuel (they ain't passing the savings in to me)
I'm not sure about that. I just booked a round trip in business class from a small MidWest city to Tokyo, through Denver on 787 Dreamliner, for $4900 in early July. That seems like savings were passed on to me.
Chevelter is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 12:52 pm
  #1059  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA Plat 1MM, HH Diamond, MR Gold
Posts: 1,145
Originally Posted by aacharya View Post
I'd be curious then if you can post the press release from UA on this news. If they're "all about marketing and PR over substance", it should be pretty easy to locate, no?
While no press release, they did post the info on Twitter. That said, it is hardly a full-throated endorsement of service resumption. Really, I'd blame the media for trumping up the news.

https://twitter.com/united/status/321383094877814784

United ‏@united 8 Apr
We’re looking at domestic flying for the 787 as we learn more about certification & modification timelines. DEN-NRT is planned for June
coolbeans202 is online now  
Old Apr 10, 13, 12:58 pm
  #1060  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 23,375
Originally Posted by Chevelter View Post
I'm not sure about that. I just booked a round trip in business class from a small MidWest city to Tokyo, through Denver on 787 Dreamliner, for $4900 in early July. That seems like savings were passed on to me.
Have you flown early July before and thusly you know its a cheap fare?

But if what you say is true then UA should be charging less $$ for say a LAX-IAH flight where it will be the 787 over the other flights where it will be another type of plane.I dont believe they ever did that

Last edited by craz; Apr 10, 13 at 1:06 pm
craz is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 1:13 pm
  #1061  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Jersey Shore/YYZ
Programs: UA 1K, Marriott Plat, Hilton Diamond, Hertz PC
Posts: 12,442
Originally Posted by coolbeans202 View Post
While no press release, they did post the info on Twitter. That said, it is hardly a full-throated endorsement of service resumption. Really, I'd blame the media for trumping up the news.

https://twitter.com/united/status/321383094877814784

United ‏@united 8 Apr
We’re looking at domestic flying for the 787 as we learn more about certification & modification timelines. DEN-NRT is planned for June
My point exactly. They didn't trumpet anything re: May 31st.
aacharya is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 1:48 pm
  #1062  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
Originally Posted by Chevelter View Post
I'm not sure about that. I just booked a round trip in business class from a small MidWest city to Tokyo, through Denver on 787 Dreamliner, for $4900 in early July. That seems like savings were passed on to me.
Individual flights are not assigned individual prices. In order for you to have gotten savings based on flying the 787, it would have taken some fare jiggering that seems unlikely.
mgcsinc is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 2:36 pm
  #1063  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ORD
Programs: 1K, MM, Marriott Plat
Posts: 427
Originally Posted by aacharya View Post
My point exactly. They didn't trumpet anything re: May 31st.
While I would love to see the 787 get back in the air, you're 'splitting hairs'. Whether it was a formal PR feed or simply a leak, United certainly promoted the announcement...

...United's expedited 787 return, spotting 787s in United's flight schedules for some Houston-Denver flights beginning May 31. "We are in the process of formulating our domestic flying plans and will be making additional schedule changes as we gain visibility to the time line for certification and modification work," United spokeswoman Christen David confirmed Monday to CNN."
seagar is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 3:16 pm
  #1064  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ORD
Programs: AA EXP,2MM, DL Gold,Starwood PLT
Posts: 3,876
I learned sometime ago not to count on anything related to the 787. Let's hope Boeing finally has it right, but i wont count on that until i see at least a year of solid reliable service. The business cases how NOT to manage a program are in full swing.
grahampros is offline  
Old Apr 10, 13, 3:20 pm
  #1065  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,243
Originally Posted by seagar View Post
While I would love to see the 787 get back in the air, you're 'splitting hairs'. Whether it was a formal PR feed or simply a leak, United certainly promoted the announcement...

...United's expedited 787 return, spotting 787s in United's flight schedules for some Houston-Denver flights beginning May 31. "We are in the process of formulating our domestic flying plans and will be making additional schedule changes as we gain visibility to the time line for certification and modification work," United spokeswoman Christen David confirmed Monday to CNN."
That quote from UA (i.e., the piece in quotes) actually sounds extremely reasonable and measured, as opposed to "promoting" it - wouldn't you agree?
star_world is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: