2 777's clip wings at IAD

Old Jan 24, 2013, 9:48 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA1K MM, BA Gold, Hyatt LT Globalist, Bonvoy LTE, IHG Diam, HH Gold, Amtrak Sel Exec
Posts: 3,170
So here's another United Airlines special:

my friend and i were both booked on 924 tonight IAD-LHR on two separate PNRs, both on W fares. we both upgraded to business using my GPUs. United rebooked us automatically and get this:
- they rebooked me (a 1K) tomorrow morning on IAD-EWR-LHR in Economy, leaving at 6am.
- they rebooked my friend (a Premier Gold) tomorrow morning on the nonstop in Business!

so strange...
kv99 is offline  
Old Jan 24, 2013, 10:50 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Programs: UA 1K, 1.2 MM
Posts: 129
Crap, I am supposed to fly out of IAD on a 777 tomorrow night, hopefully this doesn't mess with my flight.
InterFlyer is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 4:35 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: IAD/LHR/NRT
Programs: UA GS, Hyatt Platinum, HHonors Gold
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by IflyfromABE
Those gates at Dulles are horrid. Still cannot believe that they would park two 777s side by side.

I don't know... I think that UA should just fly out of there domestically only. Other than the locals who might get inconvenienced, EWR is a much more modern airport and allows for shorter connection times as well (and will get even better when UA abandons terminal A)
You cannot seriously be suggesting that United move all of its international traffic from IAD to EWR? IMHO EWR is the worst airport in the Northeast for connection hassles with their silly bus system. The delays are awful and I believe that they hire based on ability to be rude and unhelpful to passengers. Subjective issues aside, how will EWR handle the volume? It's not as if UA can simply cancel, for example, several (completely full) flights a day to LHR and consolidate that capacity via existing flights at EWR. And I'm not sure the NY metro airspace can accomodate these flights either -talk about increasing the chances for delays!

I'm sorry that you don't like IAD but I really value the direct service from IAD to LHR, GRU and NRT. I'll admit it's not the greatest airport in the world but for me the ability to get from wheels down to my front door in an hour is priceless. If UA takes your suggestion, I will be looking for another option.
Cuchulainn is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 5:46 am
  #19  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NYC
Programs: AA EXP, B6 Mosaic, UA Platinum, others
Posts: 1,270
Originally Posted by IflyfromABE
Those gates at Dulles are horrid. Still cannot believe that they would park two 777s side by side.

I don't know... I think that UA should just fly out of there domestically only. Other than the locals who might get inconvenienced, EWR is a much more modern airport and allows for shorter connection times as well (and will get even better when UA abandons terminal A)
Your argument has no basis in fact: you can argue the interior of concourse C/D at IAD is ugly, but aircraft spacing for international flights at the low-number end of C is actually greater than either EWR or ORD. They built it for 747s and 777s, and the spacing is actually quite generous to allow for multiple simultaneous operations. Aside from screwing their customers, United would be giving up one of their higher yielding, less competitive markets.

You might as well say that Newark should be abandoned because that regional yet blew 4 tires and overran the runway last week.
jmr50 is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 7:37 am
  #20  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: DEN
Programs: UA MM Plat; AA MM Gold; HHonors Diamond
Posts: 15,866
Originally Posted by uastarflyer
This was the PMCO practice right? I mean stated practice?
Yes, and I was on a flight that arrived at BWI last year and was sitting short of the gate when the pmUA Captain complained on the intercom that we would be able to move forward to the gate if the company didn't now require the wing walkers (or whatever he called them). Seems they are a good idea, as long as everyone is paying attention.
Bonehead is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 7:39 am
  #21  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 257
Originally Posted by IflyfromABE
Those gates at Dulles are horrid. Still cannot believe that they would park two 777s side by side.

I don't know... I think that UA should just fly out of there domestically only. Other than the locals who might get inconvenienced, EWR is a much more modern airport and allows for shorter connection times as well (and will get even better when UA abandons terminal A)
that is so wrong.
IAD is a great airport for connection. UA operates all its mainline flights from C&D. If you arrive in a domestic and connect to an international, you simply walk over to the C9-C1 area, which also servers domestic flights. And if you arrive in a UA international and connect to a UA domestic, you can use the transfer CPB, which is generally faster, and when you walk up to the concourse, you are at C7. even though C&D interior is a failure, the passenger movement design is definitely a good one.
but connecting to *A partner like NH and LH is a different story.
ben237829624 is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 7:51 am
  #22  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Programs: UA 1K; HH Gold; SPG Gold
Posts: 63
Okay, so I was on that Brussels flight yesterday afternoon. This may be crass, but is there any chance that I get some courtesy miles or EQM's for this?
RichmondFlyer is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 7:53 am
  #23  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Singapore
Programs: SQ KF (ex-UA)
Posts: 588
Originally Posted by ben237829624
that is so wrong.
IAD is a great airport for connection. UA operates all its mainline flights from C&D. If you arrive in a domestic and connect to an international, you simply walk over to the C9-C1 area, which also servers domestic flights. And if you arrive in a UA international and connect to a UA domestic, you can use the transfer CPB, which is generally faster, and when you walk up to the concourse, you are at C7. even though C&D interior is a failure, the passenger movement design is definitely a good one.
but connecting to *A partner like NH and LH is a different story.
Too bad the C/D concourse is an unsightly dump that should have been torn down 20 years ago. I've never seen an international hub that looks so ghetto with the possible exception of the unlamented pre-rebuild DTW. I always try to maximize my time in the LH lounge so I am in that place for the minimum amount possible.
gailwynand is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 8:19 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: ABE
Programs: DL DM, IHG Spire, Mariott Platinum (UA SI) Avis First, National Executive
Posts: 764
Originally Posted by ben237829624
that is so wrong.
IAD is a great airport for connection. UA operates all its mainline flights from C&D. If you arrive in a domestic and connect to an international, you simply walk over to the C9-C1 area, which also servers domestic flights. And if you arrive in a UA international and connect to a UA domestic, you can use the transfer CPB, which is generally faster, and when you walk up to the concourse, you are at C7. even though C&D interior is a failure, the passenger movement design is definitely a good one.
but connecting to *A partner like NH and LH is a different story.
mainline is the key word here, which usually means planes from outside the northeast (excluding large cities), because those are usually UAX arriving in terminal A. Thus the problem. I will take any hike in Newark over the terminal A to terminal C/D dash (either wait 20 minutes for the people mover or hike half an hour for a couple miles and the equivalent of 3-4 stories to get to the train.)
IflyfromABE is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 8:50 am
  #25  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern Calif./Eastern Ida.
Programs: Amethyst Premier Plutonium Medallion
Posts: 20,566
Originally Posted by RichmondFlyer
Okay, so I was on that Brussels flight yesterday afternoon. This may be crass, but is there any chance that I get some courtesy miles or EQM's for this?
if the incident did not cause you to miss your connecting flight or lead to a lengthy delay (ie, >45 mins) in disembarking the a/c, then yes, it would be somewhat ridiculous to request compensation in this case. its fairly obvious they screwed up but if it didn't cost you time or trouble with your connection, i sure wouldn't grant that request if i were reading it as a CSR.

for the record i have never heard of UA or any other airline giving EQM as compensation. you'd get an e-cert or RDMs only.
PV_Premier is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 8:57 am
  #26  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Programs: UA 1K; HH Gold; SPG Gold
Posts: 63
I once received 1,000 miles without even asking when it took 15 minutes for the aircraft to get cooled down on the tarmac in Chicago. That seemed ridiculous, but if that's worth 1,000 RDMs, it isn't crazy to think we would be compensated for a collision.
RichmondFlyer is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 9:32 am
  #27  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Potomac MD
Programs: UA MP 1K
Posts: 7,182
Originally Posted by ddrost1
for the record i have never heard of UA or any other airline giving EQM as compensation. you'd get an e-cert or RDMs only.
pmUA never gave out EQMs as compensation, no matter what the cause (or case).
euslaner is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 12:16 pm
  #28  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: DAY
Programs: UA 1K 1MM; Marriott LT Titanium; Amex MR; Chase UR; Hertz PC; Global Entry
Posts: 10,136
Originally Posted by IflyfromABE
mainline is the key word here, which usually means planes from outside the northeast (excluding large cities), because those are usually UAX arriving in terminal A. Thus the problem. I will take any hike in Newark over the terminal A to terminal C/D dash (either wait 20 minutes for the people mover or hike half an hour for a couple miles and the equivalent of 3-4 stories to get to the train.)
Agree, and would just add that it is worse to go from mainline to UAX, as you then get to wait around in the IAD version of purgatory...the A gates.

Oh...and I do not like EWR much better...give me the connection in ORD.

And much more on topic: I always hated waiting for the ground staff when just short of the gate. I always figured the wing walkers were pretty pointless. Don't know what to think now...they had the wind walkers and still managed to clip the wings.
goodeats21 is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 12:27 pm
  #29  
Moderator: Midwest, Las Vegas & Dining Buzz
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 17,965
Topic check: 2 777's clip wings at IAD

Any off-topic discussion about airports and fleet should be done in the appropriate thread.

iluv2fly
Moderator, UA
iluv2fly is offline  
Old Jan 25, 2013, 2:56 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: SEA
Programs: Bonvoy Gold
Posts: 1,938
Originally Posted by Bonehead
Yes, and I was on a flight that arrived at BWI last year and was sitting short of the gate when the pmUA Captain complained on the intercom that we would be able to move forward to the gate if the company didn't now require the wing walkers (or whatever he called them). Seems they are a good idea, as long as everyone is paying attention.
It was a CO practice that UA decided to adopt post-merger. Pre-merger, by CO's own admission, there was no evidence to suggest that wing walkers were effective. However, the new UA upheld the practice to enhance *passengers'* perception of safety.
EkekoBWI is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.