UA-NYC

Maybe the 787 can make it, even less capacity and even better for pax!

Duke787

Yeah I feel like this must play some role since I believe everywhere else they fly a 744 they have at least one other *A carrier that has a direct flight covering the same route in the event of mechanical issues.

Likewise they remain the only *A carrier offering direct service US - Australia so this also allows them to reduce capacity (267 seats on pmCO 772 vs. 374 on the 744 I believe)

fly18725

What is "better for pax"? An improved product that is provides better value or more capacity than needed so the pax can pay less and then easily upgrade?

unavaca

I'd rank the PMCO 777 above the 787, mainly because of the wider Y seats. Regardless, the PMCO 777 is a huge upgrade for the vast majority of the pax who would otherwise be on the 747.

golfingboy

I agree the flying experience will be better, but they will be paying more for the better experience. It makes me think would the vast majority of the passengers prefer to save a couple hundred and fly on a old ratty 744 with no IFE or pay more to fly on a 777?

UA-NYC

Tongue in cheek - airplane itself is of course better, but the UA configuration is definitely worse

DaviddesJ

Obviously the vast majority of passengers can't "easily upgrade". You can see that just by counting the seats in each class.

1kBill

+1.

If IFE was that darn important to them, they would already be flying QF, DL or Virgin.

Assuming this rumor does come to pass, would there any chance UA would re-configure the 777 with 10 across in Y in order to bump up the capacity? Others are have done or are doing this, including AA, AF, AC and EK.

cfischer

wow, huge equipment upgrade on this route, I might now even consider flying UA

EnvoyBoy

But not the vast majority of revenue.

FriendlySkies

Have you flown LAX/SFO-SYD and tried upgrading? Those two routes are some of the toughest in the system to upgrade on. Even with a V, H, etc fare, I've seen multiple 1Ks (and that's not to mention 1P/2P) denied an upgrade..

Kacee

Considering there is an entire thread (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...2013-a-20.html) on cancellations on this route - most of them equipment related - this would seem to be a reasonable move. Has anyone independently confirmed this is actually happening?

AeroWesty

I realize your title says 777 for SYD, but I wonder if this could mean the 787 for MEL at the same time?

LordTentacle

This +1
Also if we cared about quality of service much the same

I give UA $20k per year flying out of sydney because they are the only airline that can get me easily to IAD & RIC & RDM & RSW
Screw with my comfort and I will give up my status and just fly cheapest carrier from now on... which would probobly end up being AirNZ where you still get real booze in Y for free....


Downgrade for me
the BF seats are IMHO far WORSE on the CO777 compared to the upper deck on the 747 (I've flown both many times)
The lack of F is also anoying as whenever work books me into
The Y seats on the 747 are also IMHO better for my body shape/size (23k is always a win)

RE IFE....
If you dont already own an IPAD go buy a refurb 2nd gen 64gb and forget about ever thinking about IFE again (unless on direct tv equiped plane)

Also.... AFAIK none of the CO777's have wifi?
most of the 747's running the SYD route have had wifi for ages now and its worth $$$ to me to not be 1000emails behind when I get off the plane

Personally I'm at 11/12 for syd->lax/sfo on GPU's and 10/10 on Miles for the last 3 years

lhrsfo

They fly 2x747 SFO-LHR and there's no other *A airline on the route - competing though with BA and Virgin who both fly ancient 747s, but with modern interiors.