In terms of the runways, you can get something as large as a 757 to fly in and out of Burbank. When I was a kid, Lockheed even test landed L1011's there.

The real problem at Burbank is the size of the terminal. There just aren't sufficiently large waiting areas for larger planes.

But yeah, I grew up with Burbank airport and would love to see United fly some longer distance routes out of there. (in addition to the ones you mention, BUR-ORD would be good too.)

Probably a 772.. 15/33 is of comparable length to 02/20 at OGG which supports 772 service as far as ORD. I don't think the surrounding community would be supportive of a big increase in mainline flying though.

I hadn't even thought of that! You're right, of course.

And the neighborhood is another huge problem. But, man, a 757 or 772 from BUR to just about any UA hub east of DEN would be awesome!!!

I wonder if United would ever consider a strategy of trying to provide some extra capacity at BUR, ONT and SNA as the construction at LAX picks up. They're not flying 757s out of BUR (to say nothing of anything larger), but I can imagine that it would make things easier for some of their pax to avoid LAX as things get crazier. Just a :idea: ...

Okay, I can't contain myself any longer:

EWR-PEK

:o

Also another point of comparison - BUR has a longer runway than SNA. It's definitely an airport thing more than a runway thing.

BUR also doesn’t have regular jetways to board either...definitely agree it is easier for short hops, but I’m not sure even loading up a 73G or A319 wouldn’t cause some issues given the limited facilities.

Southwest has dozens of flights each day from BUR on the 737 so I'm not sure why it would be an issue for UA to add a couple daily frequencies to IAH/ORD and maybe a single frequency to EWR.

My ideal BUR-EWR flight would depart BUR around 8:00am and arrive at EWR around 5:00pm and then have the return flight depart from EWR around 6:30pm and arrive to BUR around 9:30pm. That would allow for connections to the TATL bank on the way to EWR and allow for a full day of work in NYC before heading back to BUR. Right now if I want to fly into BUR from NYC I would have to cut my work day short, so I usually just end up flying into LAX and eating a 1 hour cab ride home.

They can definitely load up standard size 737's. Indeed, they can board a bit faster if they want to because two stairs can be used.

​​​​​​

As this thread is for route wish lists. So moved a long discussion about the type of service for SNA to https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unit...frequency.html

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator

I second expanded BUR coverage. As a new LA resident, BUR is SO much more convenient than LAX in every way. Yes there aren’t as many ground services but this allows you to arrive late, and skip the stress of the LAX entrance and LAX-IT “experiences”.

I do enjoy the BUR-DEN routes on the 319/320, as well as BUR-SFO frequencies that are operated by the 175, 319/320’s (RJ200’s not so much). Between both DEN and SFO the connection opportunities are vast. If LAX departures require a connection then BUR is a no brainer.

BUR-IAH would be a very welcome addition as it would further expand connection coverage. BUR-EWR non PS would probably encourage most to just slug it to LAX for lie-flats (unless in Y in which case it wouldn’t matter).

As a mid-tier elite with a 7 hour minimum for paid J on my corporate travel account, PS means nothing to me. In E+ the meal is forgettable and I don't drink enough in flight to make free booze worth much. Though I will say it's much nicer to fly transcon on a 787 than a 737.

Based on that I would almost always take a hypothetical BUR-EWR over LAX-EWR despite the lesser service. I value the hour saved going to/from BUR over the slightly better E+ service from LAX. The only exception would be if I was flying to Europe on J and connecting through EWR, then it would be worth flying through LAX for the PS flights.

ahh great, and yet again, I cause another mass movement to another thread :(

EWR-SEZ (or really any-SEZ but EWR seems closest)

MSN-IAH (the only missing hub from MSN, not counting GUM)

Yes, EWR-SEZ is the shortest -- but, that's relative; it's a little longer than SFO-SIN via the great circle route. Unfortunately, that probably dooms it; I don't think the 787-8 has the legs to get there, and the 787-9 is probably too much capacity. But, hey, if they find themselves with extra -9 capacity...

I know this is not a full route thread, but I'm surprised DXB hasn't joined the list again. A place that can generate pax traffic for sure given todays environment and openness to Dubai.