SFO-MSP going RJ?
May 17, 2014, 12:56 pm
#31
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ORD
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 4,220
I've lost most of my faith in UA as a MSP teaveler. It cracks me up that UA touts the MSP-LAX flight. It's 1500 miles on a cr7! I am going to las vegas in a few weeks and was going to book UA, but wanted to fly through IAH, but since they only offered LAX as a connection DL got my first class fare.
May 17, 2014, 1:23 pm
#32
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: SFO
Programs: OZ Diamond/*G, IHG Diamond Amb, Hilton Gold
Posts: 2,240
It is most certainly a downgrade in terms of passenger comfort and aircraft amenities, but an upgrade in schedule. If UA cared to compete, they could probably run 2 A319s and be fine, but we all know UA won't do that. But, by doing this, they can spin it as an enhancement and cut costs by reducing aircraft amenities and costs by contracting to a regional airline, and most outside of FT won't realize that this is helping UA cut costs.
I suppose at some point all USA domestic and Canada/Mexico will be RJs and we will have only international flights as mainline.
I suppose at some point all USA domestic and Canada/Mexico will be RJs and we will have only international flights as mainline.
May 17, 2014, 2:55 pm
#34
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas
Programs: DL Platinum, AA Lifetime Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Platinum, Radisson Premium
Posts: 6,638
Don't get me wrong, I'd be all for any kind of improvements. But if I could ask Jeff one thing, I would ask why he doesn't compete on soft product.
May 17, 2014, 3:09 pm
#35
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Not really, when you realize that the service level on the E-170s and CRJ-700s is determined by the galley configuration. At the time those planes went into service, they were the first 2-class RJs in the U.S. Since UAL doesn't own the E-170s or CRJ-700s (unlike the 175s), it isn't as easy to make the logistical and contractual updates to support meal service. Since all of the regional airlines are hurting financial with a dim outlook, I'd hope UAL would use its leverage to bring the product up to current standards.
May 17, 2014, 3:37 pm
#36
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
May 17, 2014, 3:42 pm
#37
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SIN
Programs: UA 1K MM, SQ PPS, CX Silver, Accor Platinum, Marriott Gold, SPG Silver
Posts: 679
If you look through my posts, I'm in no way a UA sympathizer these days (it's been a brutal few years), but I call it like I see it in this case. I welcomed the UA service to sfo when it began, and I would have been more likely to fly it with two flights than the original one, even with downguage. It's a simple timing thing.
That said, I'll concede I (thank god) don't need to do nearly as many transpacs as I did the last few years, and I never fly msp to sfo anymore (though it was quite frequent in the past on both). I may be out of touch.
May 17, 2014, 5:29 pm
#38
Join Date: Dec 2010
Programs: Whatever gets me there faster.
Posts: 746
However, those planes were still built to UA cabin specs, or converted, if they weren't. In this case, UA would have to be willing to spend the money, and ease the schedule enough to allow conversions to occur. It's not all that hard to allow for service with cold meals; everything that's required to do it is already there. As for WiFi, it takes a little bit of work, but no more work than if the plane had just rolled out of the factory.
May 17, 2014, 5:30 pm
#39
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
Then once it's dark, they'll put it on transcons, most likely SFO-BOS.
May 17, 2014, 5:39 pm
#40
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
Service started today.
Which, when delivered, were built to UA's cabin specs, regardless of who owned them.
However, those planes were still built to UA cabin specs, or converted, if they weren't. In this case, UA would have to be willing to spend the money, and ease the schedule enough to allow conversions to occur. It's not all that hard to allow for service with cold meals; everything that's required to do it is already there. As for WiFi, it takes a little bit of work, but no more work than if the plane had just rolled out of the factory.
Which, when delivered, were built to UA's cabin specs, regardless of who owned them.
However, those planes were still built to UA cabin specs, or converted, if they weren't. In this case, UA would have to be willing to spend the money, and ease the schedule enough to allow conversions to occur. It's not all that hard to allow for service with cold meals; everything that's required to do it is already there. As for WiFi, it takes a little bit of work, but no more work than if the plane had just rolled out of the factory.
I don't know why he is even bothering suggesting that new E-175s will have meal service (vs. Snack Box), we all know that an airline that launches "project quality" will certainly give snack boxes...And its amazing the SkyWest (same carrier that flies for UAL) manages to have wi-fi, and real meals for DAL's flights...
I do recall that when the new SFO-MSP flight was announced, the defenders all claimed it was an example of how UAL DOES COMPETE, and how it being mainline showed that everyone was wrong... Hmmmm....
May 17, 2014, 6:47 pm
#41
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)
If they don't plan to feed premium customers a proper meal, I'll fly Delta. Simple as that.
I wonder if enough ex-SFO goes RJ, if hub captivity will soon not mean as much
If they don't plan to feed premium customers a proper meal, I'll fly Delta. Simple as that.
I wonder if enough ex-SFO goes RJ, if hub captivity will soon not mean as much
May 17, 2014, 7:08 pm
#42
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 5,825
I would look at price, and my schedule, and would likely pick DL more often than not.
UA's second frequency increases the odds that they would win my business.
Food? All I hear on here is complaints about UA's catering. And now it is a deal breaker on choosing UA or not?
With the range these aircraft have, I do not understand why UA would not configure them capable of at least serving a cold platter in F, and fresh BoB in Y.
May 17, 2014, 7:14 pm
#43
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: ORD-LAS
Programs: UA MM 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium Elite
Posts: 4,419
For this route, DL certainly makes good sense.
I would look at price, and my schedule, and would likely pick DL more often than not.
UA's second frequency increases the odds that they would win my business.
Food? All I hear on here is complaints about UA's catering. And now it is a deal breaker on choosing UA or not?
With the range these aircraft have, I do not understand why UA would not configure them capable of at least serving a cold platter in F, and fresh BoB in Y.
I would look at price, and my schedule, and would likely pick DL more often than not.
UA's second frequency increases the odds that they would win my business.
Food? All I hear on here is complaints about UA's catering. And now it is a deal breaker on choosing UA or not?
With the range these aircraft have, I do not understand why UA would not configure them capable of at least serving a cold platter in F, and fresh BoB in Y.
May 17, 2014, 7:18 pm
#44
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)
For this route, DL certainly makes good sense.
I would look at price, and my schedule, and would likely pick DL more often than not.
UA's second frequency increases the odds that they would win my business.
Food? All I hear on here is complaints about UA's catering. And now it is a deal breaker on choosing UA or not?
With the range these aircraft have, I do not understand why UA would not configure them capable of at least serving a cold platter in F, and fresh BoB in Y.
Its a dealbreaker for me now when it comes to paid F (which I do mainly on SFO-MSP route)- definitely. Mainline was barely tolerable.
As far as Y class though, I'd probably as you said go w/ the cheaper one.
Though atleast on DL I could use wifi ....
I honestly wouldn't kvetch about the RJs if F was a proper F cabin service.
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
I would look at price, and my schedule, and would likely pick DL more often than not.
UA's second frequency increases the odds that they would win my business.
Food? All I hear on here is complaints about UA's catering. And now it is a deal breaker on choosing UA or not?
With the range these aircraft have, I do not understand why UA would not configure them capable of at least serving a cold platter in F, and fresh BoB in Y.
As far as Y class though, I'd probably as you said go w/ the cheaper one.
Though atleast on DL I could use wifi ....
I honestly wouldn't kvetch about the RJs if F was a proper F cabin service.
May 17, 2014, 7:21 pm
#45
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
What type of meal service is offered in F?
I don't think the CRJ-700s, at least for SkyWest were ordered in UAL's spec, but that's not really the point. When ExPlus was introduced, F in a regional jet was market leading and there probably wasn't thought about what type of service might be required decades into the future.
Yes, you don't need an oven for cold meals. But if you want to have true F class service, you need to have sufficient cart space to store glass wear, meal trays, etc. My understanding is that the CRJ-700 galleys don't have that right now.
I never suggested the E-175s will have meal service - I simply said we shouldn't assume they won't when they hadn't gone into service. Now that they have, we can collect facts and make an informed decision.
Money can buy anything, well, most anything…
I think that was one of the main takeaways from this thread: SFO-MSP is shifting from 1x A319 to 2x E-175.
Which, when delivered, were built to UA's cabin specs, regardless of who owned them.
However, those planes were still built to UA cabin specs, or converted, if they weren't. In this case, UA would have to be willing to spend the money, and ease the schedule enough to allow conversions to occur. It's not all that hard to allow for service with cold meals; everything that's required to do it is already there. As for WiFi, it takes a little bit of work, but no more work than if the plane had just rolled out of the factory.
However, those planes were still built to UA cabin specs, or converted, if they weren't. In this case, UA would have to be willing to spend the money, and ease the schedule enough to allow conversions to occur. It's not all that hard to allow for service with cold meals; everything that's required to do it is already there. As for WiFi, it takes a little bit of work, but no more work than if the plane had just rolled out of the factory.
Yes, you don't need an oven for cold meals. But if you want to have true F class service, you need to have sufficient cart space to store glass wear, meal trays, etc. My understanding is that the CRJ-700 galleys don't have that right now.
I think that was one of the main takeaways from this thread: SFO-MSP is shifting from 1x A319 to 2x E-175.