Oct 8, 2015, 9:39 am
Last edit by: UA Insider
Hi everyone,
Today we are announcing two additional routes out of San Francisco International Airport (SFO), in addition to our previously announced Xi’an, China service. Pending government approval, we plan to operate service between San Francisco-Tel Aviv (TLV) and San Francisco-Auckland (AKL) on our Dreamliner aircraft beginning in 2016.
Check out additional details, including launch dates, in our press release.
-UA Insider
http://newsroom.united.com/2015-10-0...Make-it-Better
Today we are announcing two additional routes out of San Francisco International Airport (SFO), in addition to our previously announced Xi’an, China service. Pending government approval, we plan to operate service between San Francisco-Tel Aviv (TLV) and San Francisco-Auckland (AKL) on our Dreamliner aircraft beginning in 2016.
Check out additional details, including launch dates, in our press release.
-UA Insider
http://newsroom.united.com/2015-10-0...Make-it-Better
United Airlines Made SFO the Best Pacific Hub. And Then Found 3 Ways to Make it Better.
Airline to launch one new Atlantic and two new Pacific services
October 08, 2015
SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 8, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- United Airlines, the U.S. airline with the most comprehensive route network and the most trans-Pacific service, will further expand its global reach with new nonstop service from San Francisco to:
Tel Aviv, Israel, with service three times each week beginning March 30, 2016;
Auckland, New Zealand, with service three times each week beginning July 1, 2016, expanding to daily service in October; and
Xi'an, China, previously announced, three-times-weekly service beginning May 8, 2016, for the summer season.
Each new service is subject to government approval.
The airline intends to operate the new flights with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, the world's most advanced passenger airplane.
The Tel Aviv and Xi'an flights will be available for booking on united.com on October 10, 2015, with the Auckland flights available for booking on October 17, 2015.
San Francisco-Tel Aviv: Linking High-Tech Markets
As part of United's evaluation for serving San Francisco (SFO) to Tel Aviv (TLV) nonstop, the airline considered the opinions of thousands of customers who petitioned for the service through the SFOTLV.ORG petition effort.
"Providing corporate customers from throughout the Bay Area and Silicon Valley nonstop service to the high-tech market in Israel has been high on our priority list at United," said Dave Hilfman, United's senior vice president of worldwide sales. "Now with the 787-9 Dreamliner, we're delighted to make it a reality."
Flight | From To | Departure | Arrival
UA954 | SFO TLV | 8 p.m. We/Fr/Su | 8:10 p.m. the next day
UA955 | TLV SFO | 12:55 a.m. Tu/Fr/Su | 6 a.m. the same day
Flight times will be 14 hours, 10 minutes eastbound and 15 hours, 5 minutes westbound.
United has served Israel since 1999. The airline currently offers twice-daily Boeing 777 nonstop flights between Tel Aviv and New York/Newark.
San Francisco-Auckland
United's three-times weekly service to Auckland (AKL), New Zealand's largest city and main transportation hub to other points throughout the country, will launch July 1, 2016, with 787-8 aircraft. The schedule will expand to daily flights operating with 787-9 aircraft on Oct. 28, 2016, in time for the peak-winter travel season.
The Auckland flights will operate in partnership with United's Star Alliance partner Air New Zealand.
Flight | From To | Departure | Arrival
UA917 | SFO AKL | 10:45 p.m. | 6:55 a.m. two days later
UA916 | AKL SFO | 1:20 p.m. | 6:40 a.m. the same day
Flight times will be 13 hours, 10 minutes westbound and 12 hours, 20 minutes eastbound.
United in San Francisco
From its San Francisco hub, United operates nearly 280 daily flights to more than 90 destinations in North America, Latin America, Europe and Asia/Pacific.
Airline to launch one new Atlantic and two new Pacific services
October 08, 2015
SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 8, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- United Airlines, the U.S. airline with the most comprehensive route network and the most trans-Pacific service, will further expand its global reach with new nonstop service from San Francisco to:
Tel Aviv, Israel, with service three times each week beginning March 30, 2016;
Auckland, New Zealand, with service three times each week beginning July 1, 2016, expanding to daily service in October; and
Xi'an, China, previously announced, three-times-weekly service beginning May 8, 2016, for the summer season.
Each new service is subject to government approval.
The airline intends to operate the new flights with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, the world's most advanced passenger airplane.
The Tel Aviv and Xi'an flights will be available for booking on united.com on October 10, 2015, with the Auckland flights available for booking on October 17, 2015.
San Francisco-Tel Aviv: Linking High-Tech Markets
As part of United's evaluation for serving San Francisco (SFO) to Tel Aviv (TLV) nonstop, the airline considered the opinions of thousands of customers who petitioned for the service through the SFOTLV.ORG petition effort.
"Providing corporate customers from throughout the Bay Area and Silicon Valley nonstop service to the high-tech market in Israel has been high on our priority list at United," said Dave Hilfman, United's senior vice president of worldwide sales. "Now with the 787-9 Dreamliner, we're delighted to make it a reality."
Flight | From To | Departure | Arrival
UA954 | SFO TLV | 8 p.m. We/Fr/Su | 8:10 p.m. the next day
UA955 | TLV SFO | 12:55 a.m. Tu/Fr/Su | 6 a.m. the same day
Flight times will be 14 hours, 10 minutes eastbound and 15 hours, 5 minutes westbound.
United has served Israel since 1999. The airline currently offers twice-daily Boeing 777 nonstop flights between Tel Aviv and New York/Newark.
San Francisco-Auckland
United's three-times weekly service to Auckland (AKL), New Zealand's largest city and main transportation hub to other points throughout the country, will launch July 1, 2016, with 787-8 aircraft. The schedule will expand to daily flights operating with 787-9 aircraft on Oct. 28, 2016, in time for the peak-winter travel season.
The Auckland flights will operate in partnership with United's Star Alliance partner Air New Zealand.
Flight | From To | Departure | Arrival
UA917 | SFO AKL | 10:45 p.m. | 6:55 a.m. two days later
UA916 | AKL SFO | 1:20 p.m. | 6:40 a.m. the same day
Flight times will be 13 hours, 10 minutes westbound and 12 hours, 20 minutes eastbound.
United in San Francisco
From its San Francisco hub, United operates nearly 280 daily flights to more than 90 destinations in North America, Latin America, Europe and Asia/Pacific.
UA Announces new Auckland and Tel Aviv service from San Francisco
Oct 9, 2015, 1:17 pm
#151
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: UA SP, DL SM MM, AS 75K, SPG Platinum, Hyatt Diamond.
Posts: 2,596
they pulled TLV as it was unprofitable from PHL. While a pretty full flight, it was full of mostly low yield connections traveling over the PHL hub from elsewhere in the country. PHL simply doesn't have the critical mass of o/d flow to TLV that a NYC or a SFO has. It's that simple. AA's prior legal issues you mention meant that AA had to pay severance of around $16MM to former TWA employees in Israel. I may be off on the number somewhat, but whatever it was, had the route been profitable, it would not have been such a substantial number to put AA off from serving the route.
UA made the right choice with SFO, LAX may have been better on some grounds (787 hub supposedly) it depends on which market would me more willing to "feed" to the other. Chances are UA felt the tech folks in SFO are less willing to feed to LAX, than the market in LAX, though for biotech, LAX might have more of a market with Amgen and others????
Oct 9, 2015, 1:29 pm
#152
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
If it were exclusively a profitability issue on the PHL-TLV route AA could have moved the route to JFK or MIA or ORD or even DFW. There was more to it than route profitability. The amount of the money I doubt is the issue it's that Parker feels it's extortion, and will never pay it. It's the principal of the thing, that's keeping AA out of TLV. IMHO
UA made the right choice with SFO, LAX may have been better on some grounds (787 hub supposedly) it depends on which market would me more willing to "feed" to the other. Chances are UA felt the tech folks in SFO are less willing to feed to LAX, than the market in LAX, though for biotech, LAX might have more of a market with Amgen and others????
UA made the right choice with SFO, LAX may have been better on some grounds (787 hub supposedly) it depends on which market would me more willing to "feed" to the other. Chances are UA felt the tech folks in SFO are less willing to feed to LAX, than the market in LAX, though for biotech, LAX might have more of a market with Amgen and others????
Oct 9, 2015, 1:34 pm
#153
Join Date: Mar 2012
Programs: Mileage Plus 1K; Marriott Platinum; Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,355
...
UA made the right choice with SFO, LAX may have been better on some grounds (787 hub supposedly) it depends on which market would me more willing to "feed" to the other. Chances are UA felt the tech folks in SFO are less willing to feed to LAX, than the market in LAX, though for biotech, LAX might have more of a market with Amgen and others????
UA made the right choice with SFO, LAX may have been better on some grounds (787 hub supposedly) it depends on which market would me more willing to "feed" to the other. Chances are UA felt the tech folks in SFO are less willing to feed to LAX, than the market in LAX, though for biotech, LAX might have more of a market with Amgen and others????
Oct 9, 2015, 1:41 pm
#154
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: UA SP, DL SM MM, AS 75K, SPG Platinum, Hyatt Diamond.
Posts: 2,596
If the strategy of LAX being the 787 hub hold, it would seem those planes will have to get to SFO somehow, why fly them empty? But, that LAX 787 hub plan could be up in the air all together.
Oct 9, 2015, 1:42 pm
#155
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
That is 7670 miles, which is outside the range of anything United has since it will have to fight the winds going westbound. If it actually occurs (a big if) it will be flown with a 772LR.
Oct 9, 2015, 1:45 pm
#156
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 94
Technicality aside, SJC-BLR will never be launched by UA so that's moot.
Oct 9, 2015, 1:48 pm
#157
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SEA
Programs: UA SP, DL SM MM, AS 75K, SPG Platinum, Hyatt Diamond.
Posts: 2,596
I don't think route decisions are so cut and dry, or the same from carrier to carrier. It is probably easier for UAL to launch a new route to TLV than for AA to maintain one because UAL has a larger, more established presence in TLV, has hubs with stronger O&D and more feed, and has the right equipment. Conversely, AA is much better suited to operate more capacity from LHR.
Last edited by transportbiz; Oct 9, 2015 at 11:47 pm
Oct 9, 2015, 2:02 pm
#158
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
There are multiple routes in UA's network longer than 7670 miles today, and all flown nonstop even accounting for westbound winds. EWR-HKG is in excess of 8000mi, and done by the even less capable 77E.
Technicality aside, SJC-BLR will never be launched by UA so that's moot.
Technicality aside, SJC-BLR will never be launched by UA so that's moot.
The flight is 16 hours 5 minutes block time SFO-DEL and 16 hr 45 min DEL-SFO. (I don't know why, I would expect SFO-DEL to be longer
)EWR-HKG is blocked at 15 hours 55 min, and HKG-EWR is blocked at 15 hours 35 min. Keep in mind that as with all UA times, those are padded.
The reason the flight time is shorter is that EWR-HKG goes east bound both ways, and as such does not flight the jet stream. This also has a major impact on effective range.
SFO-DEL will have to flight the jet stream one way, which results in a longer flight and higher fuel burn. Especially in the winter United lacks an AC to go west bound to India from SFO.
Given the strong business contacts, I have no doubt whatsoever that if UA had an appropriate aircraft, they already would have been doing this route given the low fuel prices right now.
Oct 9, 2015, 2:07 pm
#159
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CLE
Programs: UA GS+LT UC, AA EXP+LT PLT, Fairmont LT PLT, Marriott PLT, Hilton DIA, Hyatt Glob, Avis CHM
Posts: 4,671
they pulled TLV as it was unprofitable from PHL. While a pretty full flight, it was full of mostly low yield connections traveling over the PHL hub from elsewhere in the country. PHL simply doesn't have the critical mass of o/d flow to TLV that a NYC or a SFO has. It's that simple. AA's prior legal issues you mention meant that AA had to pay severance of around $16MM to former TWA employees in Israel. I may be off on the number somewhat, but whatever it was, had the route been profitable, it would not have been such a substantial number to put AA off from serving the route.
CO and US both called TLV a very lucrative route in the past. The timing of the flight ending so soon after the merger and AAs unwillingness to try the route from JFK/MIA hints to other issues at play.
Perhaps paying off those TWA employees would set some sort of bad precedent?
Oct 9, 2015, 2:14 pm
#160
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 94
First, IA is doing it, already selling ticket for Dec 2 start date, so correct part of my post.
The flight is 16 hours 5 minutes block time SFO-DEL and 16 hr 45 min DEL-SFO. (I don't know why, I would expect SFO-DEL to be longer)
EWR-HKG is blocked at 15 hours 55 min, and HKG-EWR is blocked at 15 hours 35 min. Keep in mind that as with all UA times, those are padded.
The reason the flight time is shorter is that EWR-HKG goes east bound both ways, and as such does not flight the jet stream. This also has a major impact on effective range.
SFO-DEL will have to flight the jet stream one way, which results in a longer flight and higher fuel burn. Especially in the winter United lacks an AC to go west bound to India from SFO.
Given the strong business contacts, I have no doubt whatsoever that if UA had an appropriate aircraft, they already would have been doing this route given the low fuel prices right now.
The flight is 16 hours 5 minutes block time SFO-DEL and 16 hr 45 min DEL-SFO. (I don't know why, I would expect SFO-DEL to be longer
)EWR-HKG is blocked at 15 hours 55 min, and HKG-EWR is blocked at 15 hours 35 min. Keep in mind that as with all UA times, those are padded.
The reason the flight time is shorter is that EWR-HKG goes east bound both ways, and as such does not flight the jet stream. This also has a major impact on effective range.
SFO-DEL will have to flight the jet stream one way, which results in a longer flight and higher fuel burn. Especially in the winter United lacks an AC to go west bound to India from SFO.
Given the strong business contacts, I have no doubt whatsoever that if UA had an appropriate aircraft, they already would have been doing this route given the low fuel prices right now.
1. It's AI not IA
2. Block times are not an accurate measure. It's 7706mi vs. 8065mi no matter how you want to slice and dice it.
3. EWR-HKG only occasionally heads east, not all the time. By far this route is polar.
4. SFO-DEL is also very much polar, just slightly more south compared to EWR-HKG. There is zero indication that UA's 77E or 789 cannot handle such a route.
But back to your previous discussion on SJC-BLR. It is 8727mi / 7584nm, so I have absolutely no idea where your 7670 came from or even referring to.
Oct 9, 2015, 3:18 pm
#161
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Francisco/Sydney
Programs: UA 1K/MM, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Something, IHG Gold, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 8,156
By next year they'll have 787 (-8 or -9) flights from SFO to Auckland, Chengdu, Osaka, Shanghai, Sydney, Taipei, Tel Aviv, and Tokyo Haneda.
Oct 9, 2015, 3:25 pm
#162
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
The merger closed on Dec 9, 2013, a single operating certificate was issued on Apr 7, 2015, and yet the route cancellation wasn't announced until Aug 20, 2015. The flight continues until Jan 4, 2016.
US cancelled PHL-TLV because the route had not made money since it was begun in 2009; the cancellation has nothing to do with the urban legend that the former TWA employees in TLV could have seized an AA aircraft if one ever landed at TLV.
they pulled TLV as it was unprofitable from PHL. While a pretty full flight, it was full of mostly low yield connections traveling over the PHL hub from elsewhere in the country. PHL simply doesn't have the critical mass of o/d flow to TLV that a NYC or a SFO has. It's that simple. AA's prior legal issues you mention meant that AA had to pay severance of around $16MM to former TWA employees in Israel. I may be off on the number somewhat, but whatever it was, had the route been profitable, it would not have been such a substantial number to put AA off from serving the route.
As you pointed out, the route wasn't profitable, which was not surprising given that 75% of the passengers were connecting, many of them from NYC and WAS.
My suspicion is that neither DL nor UA are printing money on their NYC-TLV flights, but with one fewer competitor now that US is going to exit the market, perhaps losses will diminish (or profits, if they exist, may increase).
If it were exclusively a profitability issue on the PHL-TLV route AA could have moved the route to JFK or MIA or ORD or even DFW. There was more to it than route profitability. The amount of the money I doubt is the issue it's that Parker feels it's extortion, and will never pay it. It's the principal of the thing, that's keeping AA out of TLV. IMHO
The AA TLV situation is nothing short of bizarre.
CO and US both called TLV a very lucrative route in the past. The timing of the flight ending so soon after the merger and AAs unwillingness to try the route from JFK/MIA hints to other issues at play.
Perhaps paying off those TWA employees would set some sort of bad precedent?
CO and US both called TLV a very lucrative route in the past. The timing of the flight ending so soon after the merger and AAs unwillingness to try the route from JFK/MIA hints to other issues at play.
Perhaps paying off those TWA employees would set some sort of bad precedent?
US employees droned on and on about how PHL-TLV was the most profitable flight in the US system, and they droned on about how Parker never tolerated long-term losses, and then all of a sudden, Parker axes PHL-TLV and says it lost money from the start and was given plenty o' time to become profitable.
SFO-TLV looks like a very good idea, given the high-tech corridor, and connections from SEA and LAS and DEN and LAX can help round out the load.
Oct 9, 2015, 3:30 pm
#163
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,453
The 787s are going to be focused at SFO and LAX. SFO's going to have a whole bunch of 787 flights apart from TLV, including HND, TPE, SYD, and ICN (in addition to KIX, which is already a 787).
Oct 9, 2015, 3:30 pm
#164
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: NYC
Programs: UA 1K MM
Posts: 294
A NRT-BLR flight would do the job, no need for an ULH flight. A NRT-BLR segment would allow them to consolidate feed from LAX, SEA and DEN as well.
Oct 9, 2015, 4:58 pm
#165
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: LAF, VIE
Programs: A3 *G; AA EXP
Posts: 509
The AA TLV situation is nothing short of bizarre.
CO and US both called TLV a very lucrative route in the past. The timing of the flight ending so soon after the merger and AAs unwillingness to try the route from JFK/MIA hints to other issues at play.
Perhaps paying off those TWA employees would set some sort of bad precedent?
CO and US both called TLV a very lucrative route in the past. The timing of the flight ending so soon after the merger and AAs unwillingness to try the route from JFK/MIA hints to other issues at play.
Perhaps paying off those TWA employees would set some sort of bad precedent?
It will be interesting to see if United has to compete with EL-AL's flight to Los Angeles...