uanj

I heard one of the two daily 777s will switch to a 737 for a few months but they will keep three daily flights.

DL just announced they will drop NRT-GUM entirely. Seems as if the Japan-GUM market is way down.

HkCaGu

DL and UO both blamed Kim III's threat for scaring Japanese away from Guam, while South Koreans, already within conventional range, do not worry about going to Guam. Regardless, Japan's outbound market to SPN and GUM has been shrinking for years. Japanese carriers do not fly to SPN at all, and JL has barely one GUM flight. Korean carriers actually carry Japanese tourists to both islands flying 5th freedom, which UO was almost going to.

CS/UA had always viewed Japan as primary market for GUM and everything else secondary. That's why sCS planes fly to Japan during the day and everything else is/was red-eye: HKG, TPE, PVG, ROR, CNS, DPS. Japan has never been red-eye, once or twice daily, 6 am out, 1 am back. MNL has the prestige of both daytime and red-eye flights--1/3 of Guam being Filipino. So would this Japan cut bring more daytime flights elsewhere? UA can really compete where it couldn't with daytime flights to HKG, TPE, PVG, etc. It's brutal for Chinese-speaking tourists to arrive at 5 am after a short flight. HKG-GUM serves a full meal and you can only sleep for like 2 hours. And UO served daytime during its brief period.

Another "opportunity" I see is maybe Oscar could reverse Jeff's decision to "domesiticize" GUM-HNL. With the ongoing UA/SQ rivalry, UA was already in trouble with Gov.SG for the 789's excessive cancellations. (Now they'd cancel SYD, soon MEL from LAX.) LAX-SIN being even longer the risk isn't going to get smaller. If only UA could convert GUM-HNL to 789 (maybe LAX/SFO-HNL too for rotation) and give it back to GUM base, they'd have 787 reserve crew there ready to take over the continuation like they do Asia-SFO-EWR/ORD.

sbm12

How does putting a 787 base on GUM help reduce issues with the SFO-SIN flights??

HkCaGu

Uh, time out? (They do that eastbound Asia-ORD/EWR, cut the flight short to SFO and have new crew take over. Better than getting stuck.)

FYI, SFO-SIN always flies near GUM. SIN-SFO, not so much.

mh3265a

Sad to see CTS going away...never really understood the Yap-Palau hop but I think this has to do with a much weaker Japanese travel market. The South Korean market is really hot on Guam right now but UA can't compete there with all the LCCs.

I was a bit surprised to see UA down gauge from a 777 to 737s on the GUM-NRT flights especially with Delta leaving that market. I know many of the 777s to NRT are emptyish but still a surprising move there. I think they want to see if they can increase revenue by using the smaller aircraft.

GUM is such a unique hub but the increased pressure from LCCs in Asia is causing challenges for United and sadly I don't see them trying to compete out there whereas they are starting to compete stateside. The future for Guam would be opening up more direct routes to China and other places in SE Asia like Vietnam.

sbm12

I think the chances of a diversion to GUM to re-crew are roughly zero. Heck, diversions to re-crew are rare as it is. And I'm not sure there are any examples of SIN flights that are taking delays/cxls because of crew time-outs anyways.

EWR764

When was the last time the SFO-SIN flight (in either direction) diverted to GUM, resulting in a crew timeout? It makes zero sense to open a crew base and staff reserves for such a remote contingency, especially when the 787, as configured by UAL, is the wrong airplane for routes like GUM-HNL/NRT.

Darlox

It's been years and years since I flew that segment, but I used to be an avid scuba diver. I'll make an educated guess that segment was a small number of locals, a larger amount of inter-island cargo (particularly fresh foods), and mostly divers headed to/from live-aboards on Yap after drift-diving the reefs on Palau.

It was a hot leisure market, particularly itineraries combining those two islands, for quite a while in the mid-2000's. Absolutely no idea what's happened there recently, and if that's still the case.

sbm12

It was also a triangle route used to fill the plane by hitting two destinations on the same trip where either one likely wouldn't have sufficient demand. Such flights were more common 20 years ago than today. DL used to fly ATL-ROC-SYR-ATL and US flew PIT-ELM-ITH-PIT as other examples of the triangle routes.

SFO 1K

I can assure you this statement is absolutely NOT correct. SFO-HNL-GUM-MNL is a frequently flown route, for a number of reasons.

HkCaGu

Sorry, time out is not a result of diverting to GUM. It's the other way around. It takes very minimal delays (mechanical, sick call) to cancel a 16-17 hour flight, but if you short it to 10-12, then it can go. It's the manner how dozens of UA Asia-to-ORD/EWR flights are rescheduled and shorted to SFO every year, including the famous PVG-EWR flight with the man wearing a MAGA cap disrupting the boarding for 3 hours. An Aus-Calif flight has even been shorted to HNL due to being one pilot short. CX did it all the time before retiring the 747, shorting HKG-bound flight to Japan/Korea/Taiwan.

Are you kidding me? Isn't the poor performance common knowledge? (Well it attracted the attention of Gov.SG!)

Dublin_rfk

Brand loyal, yes!
I frequently multi stop on TPAC trips and find NRT-GUM-MNL on my schedule. Sometimes ???-HNL-NRT-GUM-MNL-SIN sometimes ???-NRT-GUM-MNL-SIN.
UA may not have the best hard product or soft product but they are consistent and consistency can be comfortable.
PS: just short of 2MM

jsloan

UA discount SFO-MNL fares allow connections via TYO, OSA, HKG, and GUM. If you're seeing a connection via PEK on a discount Y ticket, it's being priced as an end-on-end ticket. In fact, I can't find any routed fares, discount or otherwise, that allow transit through PEK. So, I'm not sure why you're seeing those search results, but it definitely doesn't match my experience. (As I was clicking through the routing rules for a few SFO-MNL fares, I did truly enjoy the TATL fares on that route, with your choice of UA or LH on the last leg. So, as soon as UA or LH codeshare with PR on LHR-MNL, or KL on AMS-TPE-MNL, there will be a whole new way to get from SFO to MNL with maximal discomfort. )

EWR764

I fully understand what you're saying... but rattling off a series of isolated incidents is, again, hardly indicative of evidence that opening a 787 pilot domicile on GUM would make any sort of business sense. I also think the perceived lack of reliability of the SFO-SIN flight is a myth. UA is careful to ensure it has a sufficient number of reserves on short call every night to staff SFO-SIN if it takes any sort of meaningful delay, even with FRMS.

The only pilots based on GUM support the 737 fleet. The 777 flight crews rotate through on long trips from the West Coast. There really is no need for a WB pilot domicile on Guam.

HkCaGu

That was post merger. Before that GUM-HNL and 2/3 GUM-NRT were sCO 764. I don't know about pilots, but sCS FAs were trained to operate both.

You might not need a pilot base (maybe just deadhead 2 from NRT/SFO?) but do need FAs who can operate 787s. UA is the largest private-sector employer on Guam anyway. Plenty of locals still remember the new (no longer) 764s with personal video screens and free meals. Also when sCO/CS gave GUM-HNL, some FAs were offered stateside transfer.