Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

Why does United put 757s on certain flights from EWR to europe

Why does United put 757s on certain flights from EWR to europe

Old Aug 6, 2014, 10:06 am
  #91  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by LETTERBOY
Just because you haven't had them doesn't mean other people haven't had them. I am unwilling to take the chance of having one.
Just to be clear: The likelihood of a fuel stop is not connected to flying the 757 TATL, it's simply a matter of flying any aircraft too close to its maximum range.

So, for example, there are also fuel stops occasionally necessary for certain variants of the 737 or A320 flying transcon flying westbound when winter headwinds are particularly strong.

Qantas currently flies the world's longest flight, DFW-SYD operated with the 747-400 ER, a special variant of the 744 which has additional fuel tanks.

It has also occasionally had to divert for fuel.

But when you're flying DUB- or SNN-EWR. the distance flown is so far below the 752's maximum range that the likelihood of a fuel stop is close to nil.

Also, just because you're flying a wide body with much greater range doesn't mean you won't need to make a fuel stop, even flying TATL, because airlines only load as much fuel as they believe will be necessary to complete the flight and occasionally conditions change en route.

So, there have also occasionally been fuel stops TATL for 767's, 777's and 747's.

As far as flying from Ireland, though, the 752's range is such that, even with the most extreme headwinds ever recorded, the plane could fly to EWR without ever needing to stop for fuel.

Finally, planes can divert for reasons other than running out of fuel, and that applies to any type of aircraft.
TWA Fan 1 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 10:10 am
  #92  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
Originally Posted by LETTERBOY
Just because you haven't had them doesn't mean other people haven't had them. I am unwilling to take the chance of having one.
What else don't you do that has a small chance of a % happening?
I've been taking several TATL 757s in the winter (mostly TXL-EWR) for the past few years and I've never had an issue either.
JVPhoto is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 10:14 am
  #93  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 70
Fourth day in a row that UA121 has to make a diversion for fuel.
t18c97 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 12:46 pm
  #94  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,187
Originally Posted by t18c97
Fourth day in a row that UA121 has to make a diversion for fuel.
Why am I never lucky enough to be on such a flight? BGR would be a cool place to stop through -- haven't flown through it since it was a hub. Still, I'd rather stop at YFB, YYR, YDF, or YQX.
Indelaware is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 1:12 pm
  #95  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: DEN
Programs: Delta Silver. Former AA gold. UA MP and DL Plat AMEX cardholder
Posts: 1,254
On time....on A.net

I got slammed a while back for saying if UA/CO couldn't operate the nonstop reliably with a 757 (BCN-EWR) then they shouldn't fly the route at all. The supporters all came out saying "Well just be happy you have the nonstop to chooose from!" I could care less since if they took it away it would just be one less flight into EWR from a congestion standpoint.

I think the FAA should be cracking down on this type of thing. I think back in 2007 there was some sort of class action suit brought against CO for the diversions but it was dropped. Anybody remember that?
REPUBLIC757 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 1:18 pm
  #96  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 491
I fly on the 757 5/6 times a year DUB-EWR. I have to say I've never felt unsafe, and we've never had to divert anywhere for fuel! Plus the fares compared to flying via the UK are incredibly reasonable!
James91 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 1:26 pm
  #97  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: DEN/OGG
Programs: UA GS
Posts: 1,482
I just completed my first round trip EWR-HAM-EWR in BF in this thing.
Never again. Besides having to leave and arrive EWR with its friendly people,
I didn't like:
1. The advertised 6'4" BF seat is way shorter than that (and we had the first row big cubby hole). I am 6'6" and couldn't sleep at all, but my 5'10" GF could not stretch out in these seats either. They are more like 5'8" useable surface.
2. The air quality is way worse than wide body, even the 767 is better
3. The staff was very lazy both ways. Hiding away and being noisy in the galley. Outbound the seatbelt sign was on the entire 7 hours
Plane-is-home is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 1:43 pm
  #98  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by REPUBLIC757
I think the FAA should be cracking down on this type of thing. I think back in 2007 there was some sort of class action suit brought against CO for the diversions but it was dropped. Anybody remember that?
It wasn't a lawsuit, it was a complaint lodged by the pilots' union with Senator Frank Lautenberg who then issued a report:

http://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/dot/fil...memo_FINAL.pdf

The report concluded that CO's TATL 757's were issuing a disproportionate number of fuel emergencies (i.e. their reserves were about to run below the minimum allowed by the FAA) thus allowing them to jump to the head of the landing queue.

The report revealed that CO's own Certificate Management Office inspector had concluded that he had concerns over using this a/c type on these TATL routes.

The report also added that CO put undue pressure on pilots to avoid making fuel stops, calling them "unnecessary" and "costly" and not too subtly implying that there could very well be a correlation between additional fuel stops and decreased bonuses.

Following the report, CO stopped exerting pressure on pilots to forego fuel stops and they have been made since then based on the best judgement of the flight deck crew.
TWA Fan 1 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 1:59 pm
  #99  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Originally Posted by James91
I fly on the 757 5/6 times a year DUB-EWR. I have to say I've never felt unsafe, and we've never had to divert anywhere for fuel! Plus the fares compared to flying via the UK are incredibly reasonable!
Ireland to the Northeast are pretty much the shortest TATL flights you can do..some domestic coast-to-coast flights in the US are barely shorter.

I'd say it's very likely most of the fuel-caused diversions affect the longer routes toward Spain and Germany.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 2:46 pm
  #100  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
Ireland to the Northeast are pretty much the shortest TATL flights you can do..some domestic coast-to-coast flights in the US are barely shorter.

I'd say it's very likely most of the fuel-caused diversions affect the longer routes toward Spain and Germany.
Actually, the shortest is KEF-JFK, it's about 2,590 miles, or about the same as U.S. domestic transcon.

In fact, KEF is so close to North America, that FI even flies KEF-DEN on a 752 non-stop (that's about 3,563 mi)
TWA Fan 1 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 2:59 pm
  #101  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
Originally Posted by TWA Fan 1
Actually, the shortest is KEF-JFK, it's about 2,590 miles, or about the same as U.S. domestic transcon.

In fact, KEF is so close to North America, that FI even flies KEF-DEN on a 752 non-stop (that's about 3,563 mi)
I barely consider Iceland TATL since let's face it, you aren't as much crossing the Atlantic as you are stopping in the middle of it.
Ber2dca is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 3:00 pm
  #102  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
Ireland to the Northeast are pretty much the shortest TATL flights you can do..some domestic coast-to-coast flights in the US are barely shorter.

I'd say it's very likely most of the fuel-caused diversions affect the longer routes toward Spain and Germany.
I think we could do the route on a 737 tbh.
Owenc is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 3:01 pm
  #103  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by Ber2dca
I barely consider Iceland TATL since let's face it, you aren't as much crossing the Atlantic as you are stopping in the middle of it.
Ha ha...good point.

Maybe it should be known as a MATL flight? (Middle of the ATLantic...)
TWA Fan 1 is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 3:02 pm
  #104  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 722
Originally Posted by TWA Fan 1
Actually, the shortest is KEF-JFK, it's about 2,590 miles, or about the same as U.S. domestic transcon.

In fact, KEF is so close to North America, that FI even flies KEF-DEN on a 752 non-stop (that's about 3,563 mi)
Iceland is half way across the ocean.
Owenc is offline  
Old Aug 6, 2014, 4:05 pm
  #105  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SFO, IAH
Programs: UA MM, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold, Hertz #1 Gold
Posts: 434
Originally Posted by BearX220
There's really no difference in individual comfort compared to the widebodies, and you get to circumvent big difficult hubs in Europe.
Aren't 757 Y seats more narrow than their widebody counterparts? According to SeatGuru for UA, it's 17.3" on a 757 and 18" on a 777/767.

Personally, I try to avoid flying 757s TATL (with a few exceptions). Some of it is mental, but I've also had several horrible experiences having to refuel due to headwinds coming back from EU. One made me miss a friend's wedding.

Here are my exceptions:
- as folks have said, to/from secondary markets where only alternatives are connecting or *A Y-. The benefit is really UA Y+ vs. non-UA Y- not the 757. For these, I sometimes actually prefer the connection
- vs. the UA 747 in Y with horrible IFE. For these, I try to select flights with other any other equipment before opting for a 757
- an upgrade can clear on a 757 vs. WL on a wide body (I'm picky but not stupid!)

That said, I think it's just pathetic when UA uses the 757 from EWR to major markets such as LHR/CDG. That's more of an issue of competitive strength than market size.

Last edited by 1Konsultant; Aug 6, 2014 at 6:14 pm
1Konsultant 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.