SFO-MSP going RJ?
May 17, 2014, 9:30 am
#18
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
Yes, its a downgrade, and when weather hits, this flight will now be cancelled. I expect this route to be gone by next year. People will get cancelled delayed and will fly DL.
May 17, 2014, 9:32 am
#19
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
If they deliver the E75s with the new hardwood slimlines I flew in a CR7 a couple weeks ago (any idea?), it will be a MISERABLE ride.
May 17, 2014, 9:46 am
#20
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
I have flown Air Canada's, again it's a downgrade. No wifi, no food, run out of liquor, and contracted service on a 3+ hour flight.
Also, it is not always 2 daily. Another ,think, didn't UA tell us these aircraft would "upgrade" smaller Express flights. Nope, all they are going to do is add another daily to either ORD, IAH or EWR. That's it.
You are trying to spin this, but the 175's were meant to upgrade smaller express not downgrade.
Also, it is not always 2 daily. Another ,think, didn't UA tell us these aircraft would "upgrade" smaller Express flights. Nope, all they are going to do is add another daily to either ORD, IAH or EWR. That's it.
You are trying to spin this, but the 175's were meant to upgrade smaller express not downgrade.
How many non-holiday weekdays have only 1 flight?
May 17, 2014, 9:47 am
#21
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,467
SFO is a much bigger airport (21 million boardings vs. 15 million for MSP in 2012).
UA has somewhere around 50% of SFO's traffic. DL has approximately 75% of MSP's traffic. Do the math and you will discover that UA@SFO=DL@MSP.
The difference isn't the size of the hubs, it's the two carriers' relative competitive strategies. DL is willing to compete in OAL hubs, UA is not.
May 17, 2014, 10:05 am
#22
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
How many SFO-CHI and SFO-NYC does DL have compared to UAL?
May 17, 2014, 10:53 am
#23
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Programs: DL Platinum, AA Lifetime Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Platinum, Radisson Premium
Posts: 6,638
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11D201 Safari/9537.53)
An improvement in comfortability. Definitely-- Not necessarily an improvement when the plane is IFE-less and meal-less in paid F.
While this route remains an RJ, I will be taking paid F business to Delta. 1K status be damned, since it really does me no good anymore anyway...
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
Have you flown an E175 yet?
In this case, I think increased frequency, on the biggest 'small' RJ, with increased F availability, is an improvement.
However, UA does need to add a meal in F (and have the fresh BoB items in in Y) on their 175's, especially on these longer flights.
In this case, I think increased frequency, on the biggest 'small' RJ, with increased F availability, is an improvement.
However, UA does need to add a meal in F (and have the fresh BoB items in in Y) on their 175's, especially on these longer flights.
While this route remains an RJ, I will be taking paid F business to Delta. 1K status be damned, since it really does me no good anymore anyway...
May 17, 2014, 11:03 am
#24
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chicago: ORD, MDW
Programs: United Million Mile Flyer, Hilton Silver, Marriott Gold, DL, AA WN
Posts: 514
On the surface, the E175 is not bad - except maybe the lack of an F meal.
However, the downgrade speaks volumes. The current United management cannot seem to understand anything but a fortress hub as in IAH and EWR. (I know, both are debatable with WN at HOU and others at LGA and JFK.)
Their strategy at ORD, SFO, DEN, and LAX is to cede flights to other airline's hubs to the other airlines. This is especially confusing when other airlines - at least occasionally - fly mainline aircraft into UA hubs.
In an individual case this might be OK, but across the board.....
However, the downgrade speaks volumes. The current United management cannot seem to understand anything but a fortress hub as in IAH and EWR. (I know, both are debatable with WN at HOU and others at LGA and JFK.)
Their strategy at ORD, SFO, DEN, and LAX is to cede flights to other airline's hubs to the other airlines. This is especially confusing when other airlines - at least occasionally - fly mainline aircraft into UA hubs.
In an individual case this might be OK, but across the board.....
May 17, 2014, 11:15 am
#25
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SIN
Programs: UA 1K MM, SQ PPS, CX Silver, Accor Platinum, Marriott Gold, SPG Silver
Posts: 679
Actually the schedule change is an improvement:
goes from 1 319 daily to 2 E-175 Daily (Msp-Sfo) 7:30am and 5:00pm
and allows morning and evening service
seat count goes from 120 to 152
all coaches seats are 2 and 2
first class goes from 8 to 24 seats
175s may have food
this is really a comfortable plane with more frequency
Flyer talk continues with all negative but never good news
goes from 1 319 daily to 2 E-175 Daily (Msp-Sfo) 7:30am and 5:00pm
and allows morning and evening service
seat count goes from 120 to 152
all coaches seats are 2 and 2
first class goes from 8 to 24 seats
175s may have food
this is really a comfortable plane with more frequency
Flyer talk continues with all negative but never good news
It's my 2c...
May 17, 2014, 12:13 pm
#26
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Programs: DL Platinum, AA Lifetime Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Platinum, Radisson Premium
Posts: 6,638
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11D201 Safari/9537.53)
Despite the detractors, I actually agree that this is an improvement. I don't live in MSP anymore, but remember clearly not that long ago that United had no nonstop service to MSP. Personally, were I still flying that route frequently, morning and evening options would be very welcome, and I'd even take a 175 (assuming an upgrade, which I almost always got anyway, but will be easier with more total seats).
It's my 2c...
Upgrades on this route were near impossible so I ended up buying F fares since the merger. I will do so no longer because 4 hours without a meal is totally unacceptable for a premium cabin.
Originally Posted by paulyras
Actually the schedule change is an improvement:
goes from 1 319 daily to 2 E-175 Daily (Msp-Sfo) 7:30am and 5:00pm
and allows morning and evening service
seat count goes from 120 to 152
all coaches seats are 2 and 2
first class goes from 8 to 24 seats
175s may have food
this is really a comfortable plane with more frequency
Flyer talk continues with all negative but never good news
goes from 1 319 daily to 2 E-175 Daily (Msp-Sfo) 7:30am and 5:00pm
and allows morning and evening service
seat count goes from 120 to 152
all coaches seats are 2 and 2
first class goes from 8 to 24 seats
175s may have food
this is really a comfortable plane with more frequency
Flyer talk continues with all negative but never good news
It's my 2c...
May 17, 2014, 12:26 pm
#27
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11D201 Safari/9537.53)
Upgrades on this route were near impossible so I ended up buying F fares since the merger. I will do so no longer because 4 hours without a meal is totally unacceptable for a premium cabin.
Upgrades on this route were near impossible so I ended up buying F fares since the merger. I will do so no longer because 4 hours without a meal is totally unacceptable for a premium cabin.
May 17, 2014, 12:29 pm
#28
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Programs: DL Platinum, AA Lifetime Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Platinum, Radisson Premium
Posts: 6,638
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11D201 Safari/9537.53)
Has it been confirmed that the E-175s will not be equipped to serve meals?
The website says "United Express flights over 700+ miles" get a snackbox etc. No exception on there noted for 175s.
Originally Posted by fly18725
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11D201 Safari/9537.53)
Upgrades on this route were near impossible so I ended up buying F fares since the merger. I will do so no longer because 4 hours without a meal is totally unacceptable for a premium cabin.
Upgrades on this route were near impossible so I ended up buying F fares since the merger. I will do so no longer because 4 hours without a meal is totally unacceptable for a premium cabin.
May 17, 2014, 12:31 pm
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,644
Despite the detractors, I actually agree that this is an improvement. I don't live in MSP anymore, but remember clearly not that long ago that United had no nonstop service to MSP. Personally, were I still flying that route frequently, morning and evening options would be very welcome, and I'd even take a 175 (assuming an upgrade, which I almost always got anyway, but will be easier with more total seats).
It's my 2c...
It's my 2c...
May 17, 2014, 12:39 pm
#30
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 7_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/537.51.2 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/7.0 Mobile/11D201 Safari/9537.53)
The website says "United Express flights over 700+ miles" get a snackbox etc. No exception on there noted for 175s.
The website says "United Express flights over 700+ miles" get a snackbox etc. No exception on there noted for 175s.