Dec 9, 2016, 11:15 am
Last edit by: FlyHighInTheSky
https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/travel/inflight/aircraft/777/300/default.aspx
UA Orders Boeing 777-300ERs / 77Ws w/ 1-2-1 Polaris Business, 3-4-3 Economy
Apr 27, 2015, 1:34 pm
#316
Suspended
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 2MM, AA MM, SPG Platinum
Posts: 22
Actually it would be 4 plans when all said and done :
PMUA 3-class 772
PMCO 2-class 772
Hawaii 777 (recliners)
Domestic 777 (rumored 28 lie flats)
Apr 27, 2015, 2:36 pm
#317
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, AA, DL
Posts: 7,418
If they wanted to address this problem, they would have some planes with larger premium cabins, but available to fly any route.
Apr 28, 2015, 1:44 pm
#318
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Washington, D.C.
Programs: UA Premier 1K: PlAAtinum; DL SM, MM; Marriott Gold; CO Plat Emeritus; NW Plat Emeritus
Posts: 4,776
And no one seems to be speculating that UA could -- maybe -- introduce a modern direct aisle access J product on the new fleet, even if it affects seating capacity. naaah, that's for DL And AA.
Apr 28, 2015, 2:11 pm
#319
Suspended
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 2MM, AA MM, SPG Platinum
Posts: 22
Either the SK one or the AC787/QR350 one is really great.
Apr 28, 2015, 4:11 pm
#320
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: SEA, WAS, PEK
Programs: UA 3K UGS 3MM
Posts: 2,176
I was responding to your previous comment that implied a negative connotation when transitioning from a 744 to a 77E. I was providing examples that it has been done before.
Another possibility would be 2-class 77W going on EWR-HKG, freeing up 2-class PMCO 77E to be placed on either ORD-HKG or SFO-SYD.
Another possibility would be 2-class 77W going on EWR-HKG, freeing up 2-class PMCO 77E to be placed on either ORD-HKG or SFO-SYD.
My guess is LAX-SYD goes 2-cabin (why bother with a premium product with the horrible ground services there) as well as all EWR pmUA 772 routes, save for maybe LHR which I hear has good F traffic.
Apr 28, 2015, 9:42 pm
#321
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: SYD, CBR, BDL
Programs: UA 1K, VA Platinum
Posts: 1,198
I'd be shocked if they moved ORD-HKG and SFO-SYD to 2 cabin routes. HKG/SYD have real paid F traffic and I'd think UA would be smart enough to shift those to 2-cabin last.
My guess is LAX-SYD goes 2-cabin (why bother with a premium product with the horrible ground services there) as well as all EWR pmUA 772 routes, save for maybe LHR which I hear has good F traffic.
My guess is LAX-SYD goes 2-cabin (why bother with a premium product with the horrible ground services there) as well as all EWR pmUA 772 routes, save for maybe LHR which I hear has good F traffic.
Apr 28, 2015, 10:44 pm
#322
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: SEA, WAS, PEK
Programs: UA 3K UGS 3MM
Posts: 2,176
Apr 29, 2015, 2:16 am
#323
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR, BDL
Posts: 4,471
I posted this in the other thread but I'll post here as well. Proposed configuration of the 77W fleet does not include an F cabin.
Apr 29, 2015, 2:41 am
#324
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,762
Proposed configuration of the 77W fleet does not include an F cabin.
Apr 29, 2015, 6:26 am
#325
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,171
Bigger question is, since we all know it will have the standard PMCO biz seats, will it have more than the 50 found on the 772? Or will it become more Y-heavy.
Apr 29, 2015, 8:43 am
#326
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: UA 1K 1MM, AA, DL
Posts: 7,418
He previously posted an expectation that it would have more premium seats. Not clear whether the ratio would be the same.
Apr 29, 2015, 8:52 am
#327
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,466
Or of course they could do something radical and simply purchase a state of the art off-the-shelf solution like Cirrus or Solstys which are already approved for this aircraft. (I know, not gonna happen.)
Apr 29, 2015, 9:01 am
#328
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
n.b. The link above is to my blog or to one which I am a regular contributor. FT rules require that I disclose that in the post.
Last edited by sbm12; Apr 29, 2015 at 9:08 am
Apr 29, 2015, 9:54 am
#329
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London; Bangkok; Las Vegas
Programs: AA Exec Plat; UA MM Gold; Marriott Lifetime Titanium; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,745
A new design would be nice, but that 5+ year design is far, far superior to the 7+ year design CO/UA seem to like so much (including on its brand new 789s). But, yes, I know you are aware of that.
Apr 29, 2015, 10:09 am
#330
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 402
Of course not. Why would a two-class of service airline buy a new airplane configured with three classes of service?
A new design would be nice, but that 5+ year design is far, far superior to the 7+ year design CO/UA seem to like so much (including on its brand new 789s). But, yes, I know you are aware of that.
A new design would be nice, but that 5+ year design is far, far superior to the 7+ year design CO/UA seem to like so much (including on its brand new 789s). But, yes, I know you are aware of that.
However, the only plane where this may make sense is the 77W, and possibly the A350. So I doubt we'll really see this introduced fleet wide.