Community
Wiki Posts
Search
Old Aug 26, 2017, 4:13 pm
FlyerTalk Forums Expert How-Tos and Guides
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Archive thread What Route(s) do You Wish UA Flew? [Archive thread]

Thanks, United forum Moderators.

Print Wikipost

What Route(s) do you wish UA Flew?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 18, 2020, 1:46 pm
  #76  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Originally Posted by iapetus
What's the largest plane that they can get in and out of BUR? United flies nothing larger than the A319, AFAIK, and BUR-EWR on an A319 would be a pretty brutal trip. I wouldn't do it. But I might be inclined to fly BUR-IAH on an A319 if the schedule worked out well.
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.)
SPN Lifer likes this.
dilanesp is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2020, 2:01 pm
  #77  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, UA Gold, WN, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 14,410
Originally Posted by iapetus
What's the largest plane that they can get in and out of BUR? United flies nothing larger than the A319, AFAIK, and BUR-EWR on an A319 would be a pretty brutal trip. I wouldn't do it. But I might be inclined to fly BUR-IAH on an A319 if the schedule worked out well.
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.
findark is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2020, 2:19 pm
  #78  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pasadena, California
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 10,412
Originally Posted by dilanesp
The real problem at Burbank is the size of the terminal. There just aren't sufficiently large waiting areas for larger planes.
I hadn't even thought of that! You're right, of course.

Originally Posted by findark
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.
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 ...
iapetus is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2020, 3:32 pm
  #79  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: AVP & PEK
Programs: UA 1K 1.8MM
Posts: 6,349
Okay, I can't contain myself any longer:

EWR-PEK

narvik is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2020, 3:39 pm
  #80  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, UA Gold, WN, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 14,410
Originally Posted by iapetus
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 ...
Also another point of comparison - BUR has a longer runway than SNA. It's definitely an airport thing more than a runway thing.
SPN Lifer and Boraxo like this.
findark is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2020, 4:41 pm
  #81  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 9,005
Originally Posted by findark
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.
PsiFighter37 is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2020, 5:26 pm
  #82  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: LAX
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by PsiFighter37
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.

Last edited by Seph87; Feb 18, 2020 at 5:42 pm
Seph87 is offline  
Old Feb 18, 2020, 6:36 pm
  #83  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Originally Posted by Seph87
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.

​​​​​​
dilanesp is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2020, 8:46 pm
  #84  
Moderator: United Airlines
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,850
As this thread is for route wish lists. So moved a long discussion about the type of service for SNA to EWR-SNA - who regulary flies? upgrades? frequency? .....

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
SPN Lifer and goodeats21 like this.
WineCountryUA is offline  
Old Feb 19, 2020, 9:38 pm
  #85  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: LAX
Programs: UA Global Services 1MM,, AA Exec Plat. Hilton Honors Diamond, Marriott Gold, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 606
Originally Posted by dilanesp
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.

​​​​​​
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).
SPN Lifer likes this.
globetraveler is offline  
Old Feb 20, 2020, 10:05 am
  #86  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: LAX
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by globetraveler
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.
Seph87 is offline  
Old Feb 21, 2020, 3:20 am
  #87  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: SNA (home), LAX, BOM/PNQ, LHR
Programs: UA 1K/*G, Marriott Gold Elite, IHG Platinum, HHonors Silver
Posts: 965
Originally Posted by WineCountryUA
As this thread is for route wish lists. So moved a long discussion about the type of service for SNA to EWR-SNA - who regulary flies? upgrades? frequency? .....

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator

WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
ahh great, and yet again, I cause another mass movement to another thread
flyingrohit is offline  
Old Feb 24, 2020, 11:44 pm
  #88  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Programs: UA 1P
Posts: 320
EWR-SEZ (or really any-SEZ but EWR seems closest)

MSN-IAH (the only missing hub from MSN, not counting GUM)
LXFlyer is offline  
Old Feb 25, 2020, 12:48 am
  #89  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,400
Originally Posted by LXFlyer
EWR-SEZ (or really any-SEZ but EWR seems closest)
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...
jsloan is offline  
Old Mar 24, 2021, 6:57 pm
  #90  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Programs: Marriott Ambassador, UA Mileage Plus 1K, AA Executive Plat, Marriott Ambassador Elite
Posts: 2,344
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.

Last edited by WineCountryUA; Mar 24, 2021 at 7:05 pm Reason: Moved to referenced thread
CALMSP is offline  


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.