Aug 17, 2013, 10:44 am
Last edit by: Bitterroot
Updates to Wiki as of 20 January 2014
Planned changes in aircraft by date and route:
SFO -- SYD: first 772 departs SFO 27 March; turns to 840 at SYD on 29 March
LAX -- SYD: first 772 departs LAX 29 March; turn off 840-29th.
NRT -- ORD: First 744 departs NRT 27 March (aircraft turn at ORD to PVG and FRA in succession the day following arrival from NRT)
ORD -- NRT: First 744 departs ORD 31 March
ORD -- PVG: First 744 departs ORD 28 March
PVG -- ORD: First 744 departs PVG 29 March
ORD -- FRA: First 744 departs ORD 29 March
FRA -- ORD: First 744 departs FRA 30 March
NRT -- SFO: 852 to operate with 772 27 March through 31 March inclusive (772 coming out of rotation)
Or, you can just go look at the good work here (note that info posted above differs from AIRLINEROUTE info dated 4 January 2014 and before):
http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/17/ua-s14update1/
Or, straight to the source if you want to do your own research:
http://www.oag.com/Global
Planned changes in aircraft by date and route:
SFO -- SYD: first 772 departs SFO 27 March; turns to 840 at SYD on 29 March
LAX -- SYD: first 772 departs LAX 29 March; turn off 840-29th.
NRT -- ORD: First 744 departs NRT 27 March (aircraft turn at ORD to PVG and FRA in succession the day following arrival from NRT)
ORD -- NRT: First 744 departs ORD 31 March
ORD -- PVG: First 744 departs ORD 28 March
PVG -- ORD: First 744 departs PVG 29 March
ORD -- FRA: First 744 departs ORD 29 March
FRA -- ORD: First 744 departs FRA 30 March
NRT -- SFO: 852 to operate with 772 27 March through 31 March inclusive (772 coming out of rotation)
Or, you can just go look at the good work here (note that info posted above differs from AIRLINEROUTE info dated 4 January 2014 and before):
http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/17/ua-s14update1/
Or, straight to the source if you want to do your own research:
http://www.oag.com/Global
[Confirmed] SYD going UA 3 Cabin 777 in 2014 [and other 747 route changes]
Aug 18, 2013, 12:31 pm
#361
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
Do check your optimizer, it looks like you have lost the plot. This down gauging is going to leave you with fewer and fewer passengers that ultimately it might be cheaper for you to buy consolidator style seats on other carriers and send your passengers to them. Maybe that is what the Star Alliance is for you.
Aug 18, 2013, 12:35 pm
#362
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Hoboken, NJ; Pembroke Pines, FL
Programs: CO Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 2,939
Is UA downgauging across the board or are they reallocating equipment into other markets? It seems to me that in the international markets they've only retired the 762s as the 787s come online so there aren't any international downgauges only reallocations, right?
Domestically mainline capacity is about what it was before the merger, right? I understand that there has been a lot of reallocation of mainline equipment into some markets and out of others markets.
The second of these questions is off-topic to the thread topic but I thought I'd bring it up as complementary to the first question.
Domestically mainline capacity is about what it was before the merger, right? I understand that there has been a lot of reallocation of mainline equipment into some markets and out of others markets.
The second of these questions is off-topic to the thread topic but I thought I'd bring it up as complementary to the first question.
Aug 18, 2013, 12:38 pm
#363
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SFO
Programs: Alaska MVP; Hawaiian Miles; WN Rapid Rewards A list
Posts: 350
The 777s can obviously work on the SFO/LAX/SYD routes and have proven to be a very reliable plane since they came out in 1995. That being said, pilots will candidly tell you that flying a 2 engine plane over the vast reaches of the Pacific Ocean with no landing strip available for hours on end makes them a lot more nervous that flying the polar routes.
Aug 18, 2013, 12:49 pm
#364
Suspended
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,961
Why? I'm sure you're much farther from any landing site on the polar routes than over the ocean.
Aug 18, 2013, 12:56 pm
#365
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Francisco/Sydney
Programs: UA 1K/MM, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Something, IHG Gold, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 8,162
For SFO-SYD you need to go up to ETOPS 180 before it's possible (The actual number appears to be somewhere around 150 - ETPOS 138 is not enough).
Personally I've historically avoided the twins on the Australia-US flights - sounds like other than moving back to QF there's not going to be any option now...
Aug 18, 2013, 1:00 pm
#366
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SFO
Programs: Alaska MVP; Hawaiian Miles; WN Rapid Rewards A list
Posts: 350
Aug 18, 2013, 1:09 pm
#367
Suspended
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,961
Based on gcmap.com, SFO-LHR or SFO-HKG are both within range of ETOPS 90 (ie, never more than 90 minutes from a suitable landing site).
Aug 18, 2013, 1:48 pm
#368
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
My biggest fear on long haul overwater ops is blind to the 2 vs. 4 engine issue... fire. I think many pilots feel that way too.
Aug 18, 2013, 2:14 pm
#369
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
Based on gcmap.com, SFO-LHR or SFO-HKG are both within range of ETOPS 90 (ie, never more than 90 minutes from a suitable landing site).
For SFO-SYD you need to go up to ETOPS 180 before it's possible (The actual number appears to be somewhere around 150 - ETPOS 138 is not enough).
Personally I've historically avoided the twins on the Australia-US flights - sounds like other than moving back to QF there's not going to be any option now...
For SFO-SYD you need to go up to ETOPS 180 before it's possible (The actual number appears to be somewhere around 150 - ETPOS 138 is not enough).
Personally I've historically avoided the twins on the Australia-US flights - sounds like other than moving back to QF there's not going to be any option now...
Aug 18, 2013, 2:21 pm
#370
Suspended
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 1,961
When was the last time a large passenger plane had to ditch when flying between Hawaii and the US mainland (which, as noted, is the biggest gap for most routes across the "vast Pacific")?
It seems that the reliability of modern engines is such that a systems failure that affects the whole plane, or a threat like a fire onboard, is a more serious concern than multiple engine failures. Although there's always a first time.
It seems that the reliability of modern engines is such that a systems failure that affects the whole plane, or a threat like a fire onboard, is a more serious concern than multiple engine failures. Although there's always a first time.
Aug 18, 2013, 2:28 pm
#371
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
[Confirmed] SYD going UA 3 Cabin 777 in 2014 [and other 747 route changes]
Now that this thread has gone dark I'm out.
sUA stays sUA bottom line. So 3 class to/from SYD is intact. Cool. Thanks all.
sUA stays sUA bottom line. So 3 class to/from SYD is intact. Cool. Thanks all.
Aug 18, 2013, 4:06 pm
#372
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,814
Talk about being in the dark , are we talking about 2 or 3 777s to Australia each day?
I pay for J for half my trips to the US and buy W or H/M for the rest in the hope of getting upgraded.
If UA is going for 2 x 777s only , that is a real reduction in terms of seating and seat comfort as well as decreased upgrade availability.
Three flights per day to Australia would be ok but 2 !!!
I pay for J for half my trips to the US and buy W or H/M for the rest in the hope of getting upgraded.
If UA is going for 2 x 777s only , that is a real reduction in terms of seating and seat comfort as well as decreased upgrade availability.
Three flights per day to Australia would be ok but 2 !!!
Aug 18, 2013, 5:49 pm
#373
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Syd
Programs: UA 1k 1MM, VA G
Posts: 886
Talk about being in the dark , are we talking about 2 or 3 777s to Australia each day?
I pay for J for half my trips to the US and buy W or H/M for the rest in the hope of getting upgraded.
If UA is going for 2 x 777s only , that is a real reduction in terms of seating and seat comfort as well as decreased upgrade availability.
Three flights per day to Australia would be ok but 2 !!!
I pay for J for half my trips to the US and buy W or H/M for the rest in the hope of getting upgraded.
If UA is going for 2 x 777s only , that is a real reduction in terms of seating and seat comfort as well as decreased upgrade availability.
Three flights per day to Australia would be ok but 2 !!!
777's during australian offpeek winter and 747's during aussie summer
from a buisness standpoint this makes some sense and also explains why they are not doing it effective much sooner then april next year
I do have a question around Pilot rest though....
do the SUA 777's have a bed area like the 747's do?
or are we going to lose a F seat to them as well?
Aug 18, 2013, 6:00 pm
#374
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
At least that's how it used to be. I do not believe UA has installed overhead crew rest areas on its 777s.
Aug 18, 2013, 6:39 pm
#375
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,613
In 1956, a Pan Am Boeing 377 was flying from HNL to SFO. Halfway across, they lost two engines, and because they didn't have enough fuel to make to SFO or return to HNL, they turned back towards Hawaii and headed for the USCGC Pontchartrain at Ocean Station November. Once arriving at OSN, the aircraft circled around until daybreak when it ditched - all 31 on board survived.