Lie Flat flights BOS-West Coast (LAX/SFO)
Sep 17, 2014, 9:44 am
#2
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CT/NY
Programs: UA 1K/1MM, AA EXP, Marriott LT Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Plat Amb
Posts: 6,020
Interesting... Looking at the timetable, looks like they started using the p.s. configured plane for BOS-LAX nonstop starting on 10/27, and LAX-BOS starting on 10/28.
Could this be the start of much-clamored BOS p.s. flight?
Could this be the start of much-clamored BOS p.s. flight?
Sep 17, 2014, 10:32 am
#8
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA1K
Posts: 4,044
it most likely will be an equipment swap. i would not expect the p.s. planes to be on this route unless it is for aircraft positioning.
Sep 17, 2014, 11:04 am
#9
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: NYC
Programs: AA EXP, Hilton GLD, Marriott Plat, NEXUS/GE
Posts: 2,872
for one, B6 has 3 flights per day to LAX to UA's 1. UA won't put p.s. on a market that can only support one flight a day and cannot support the p.s. fares that JFK can demand.
it most likely will be an equipment swap. i would not expect the p.s. planes to be on this route unless it is for aircraft positioning.
it most likely will be an equipment swap. i would not expect the p.s. planes to be on this route unless it is for aircraft positioning.
This is almost certainly a glitch in United.com. Jut ask anyone flying a Q400 TATL if they think so.
Sep 17, 2014, 11:18 am
#10
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: BDL/NYC/BOS
Programs: UA/*A Gold, Global Entry, Marriott Plat, Hilton+IHG Gold, Hertz PC, DL
Posts: 1,752
i agree that it's a glitch, but if there was to be a city added to p.s., BOS is the best choice. competitive transcon market, high O/D percentage, and a corporate base that can sustain high fares.
that being said, UA probably isn't too fond of how massport is throwing money left and right to foreign carriers (EK, CX, HU, JL). i don't have insight into load numbers for those flights, but it's probably not a bad sign that EK upgauged from a 772 to a 773.
i understand that the p.s. subfleet isn't big enough to simply add a city at this point - but i can dream!
that being said, UA probably isn't too fond of how massport is throwing money left and right to foreign carriers (EK, CX, HU, JL). i don't have insight into load numbers for those flights, but it's probably not a bad sign that EK upgauged from a 772 to a 773.
i understand that the p.s. subfleet isn't big enough to simply add a city at this point - but i can dream!
Sep 17, 2014, 11:57 am
#11
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA1K
Posts: 4,044
BOS is sort of on the wrong end for an aircraft repositioning on p.s. Deadheading the plane to BOS and then flying it on a route that has far more premium seats than the route can support seems odd.
This is almost certainly a glitch in United.com. Jut ask anyone flying a Q400 TATL if they think so.
This is almost certainly a glitch in United.com. Jut ask anyone flying a Q400 TATL if they think so.
and we have had this discussion multiple times. BOS does not have the $ to support the p.s. fares that JFK-LAX/SFO command. hence why p.s. is only on the NY-california markets.
Sep 17, 2014, 12:31 pm
#12
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,450
I doubt it's a glitch. They shift these aircraft around from time to time and probably feel they don't need one of them on the ps route during that period.
ps fares are quite low right now, around $2200 RT. They've been even lower (in the $1200 range) recently. Given the competitive landscape, with AA, DL, and B6 all competing for the same pax, this could continue for a while.
ps fares are quite low right now, around $2200 RT. They've been even lower (in the $1200 range) recently. Given the competitive landscape, with AA, DL, and B6 all competing for the same pax, this could continue for a while.
Sep 17, 2014, 12:34 pm
#13
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Minneapolis MN
Programs: DL PM
Posts: 488
Yeah definitely not getting my hopes up. I did request an ug though just in case!
It'll be interesting to see if it was intentional. I originally thought they were putting an INTL 757 on this route when I booked it, but then realized 7 rows of F was P.S.
It'll be interesting to see if it was intentional. I originally thought they were putting an INTL 757 on this route when I booked it, but then realized 7 rows of F was P.S.
Sep 17, 2014, 12:36 pm
#14
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,450
Last edited by Kacee; Sep 17, 2014 at 12:44 pm