garkster

On the WN forum, I opened a thread regarding 50% cancellation of their PDX-SFO flights the last two days (turns out it was the same going the other way, and apparently not because the same a/c was turning around). My theory/speculation is that WN may be getting crushed in this market by AS(+legacy VX) and UA, and will retreat to PDX-OAK where they have a better position, but I digress.

Anyway, haven't gotten much of value so far, but one comment gave me pause, to the effect that when SFO capacity is reduced, UA grabs OO slots to support the mainline ops. I've certainly seen the boards light up at SFO with OO cancels, and have also heard the tales of folks being stuck in MRY et al for days, but it never occurred to me that this might be the reason.

Imprinted on my brain is to not book OO-operated flights in the West Coast corridor either single segment or as a connection, especially in the winter months, but does anyone know if this is actually true?

jsloan

In general, when ops are impacted, UA will give priority to its mainline flights over United Express flights, simply because they affect more people. So, from that point of view, it's undeniably true.

From another point of view -- and this is speculation -- I'd be surprised if it were 100% true. OO operates some flights at-risk -- meaning, they benefit from the passenger load, like a code-share. I'd be somewhat surprised if UA ops had as much control over cancelling those as it would a flight were OO is serving purely as a subcontractor.

However, I don't know if that's useful, because I'm not sure that it's possible to tell which flights are operated at-risk and which aren't. (For EAS locations, I think it's specified in the bid, but I believe they operate some non-EAS locations at-risk also).

Having said that -- operations at SFO can be a mess at any time. I wouldn't go out of my way to avoid OO. I mean, fine, if there are two equally convenient flights and one is mainline and the other is OO, it might make sense to take the mainline flight. But if you take a flight that's three hours later just to avoid the possibility of a delay on OO, you're basically just delaying yourself.

escapefromphl

I always thought it was because many of the mainline flights are en route at that point while shorter regional flights can be held at the origin. Mainline flights from LAX usually turn into a bit of a mess when SFO is restricted.

jsloan

That's a concern as well, yes. It's certainly more nuanced than just "delay United Express first." But, all things being equal, if you have two similar-distance flights, and there are restrictions at any airport, they'll typically delay the smaller plane more than the larger plane, since that will usually affect fewer passengers. So, if OP were choosing between two nonstop flights, that could be a determining factor.

But you're right; if OP is choosing between AUS-SFO on OO and AUS-LAX-SFO on OO/UA, there's a reasonable possibility that AUS-SFO would be in the air before conditions worsened at SFO and would end up taking priority over LAX-SFO that could be held at the origin.

One more reason just to take the more convenient flight, as far as I'm concerned.

mduell

It may be more clear to phrase it differently: when a delay program (GDP/AFP/GS) is implemented by the FAA, they ration out the slots by schedule to the organization that scheduled them. So UA gets all the slots for UA scheduled flights, whether they be UA or UAX. UA then is free to swap around between flights to prioritize their more important flights by whatever business rules, and operational constraints, they want. The regionals don't even have the technology systems to do these swaps, but they have enough flights they can't be exempted like the foreign carriers.

So at SFO, during a program you'll see UA mainline outperform WN mainline because it makes sense for UA to push the pain to UAX (fewer pax, higher frequency, etc).

Or out of scope entirely since ZHU is third tier to ZOA.

jsloan

That too. I guess my point -- and I think we're agreeing here -- is that (a) it's not a hard-and-fast rule that a mainline flight will always operate in preference to a United Express flight, but (b) all things being equal, UA is more likely to give preferential treatment to mainline flights where possible.

milepig

\

And, in my experience to INTL flights first - INTL/domestic mainline/regional. I've been at ORD many times watching the board light up with canceled domestic flights where the INTL flights are more or less leaving normally.

mduell

Largely a function of size (widebody) and frequency (1/day), moreso than the international aspect; flights to CA/MX are treated more like the domestic flights than flights to China/Japan/Europe/etc.

garkster

Thanks for all of the comments and insights.

Certainly per one example I'd take the OO AUS/SFO non-stop over a connection in LAX without a second thought. Also, certainly wouldn't book something 3 hours later to avoid OO; was thinking about the high-frequency west coast routes where both UA and OO are within 60-90 minutes, and since OO has a significantly higher cxl rate, would book the UA.

IME, long-hauls have greater priority, and have much experience where the hub-to-hub mid-con mainlines (IAH/SFO) are delayed on the ground in Houston as soon as the program starts up in the morning (can be as early as 0900 CST), even though there is possibly a lot of Asia- and Hawaii connecting traffic on the flights to SFO.

prestonh

Several years ago it was explained to me by the UX FAT station manager like this: All the UA westbound transcon birds get in the air mostly before the first bank of UX gets out. So as the first bank gets set to roll into SFO, the transcons are getting in and if flow control is set by FAA, its not like tracon or approach is going to divert vs issue ground holds to flights not already departed for the closer US flights. That's phase I. The UX operations are then hobbled from the beginning. Then the TPAC birds start coming in forcing more ground holds. As the down-the-line delays now start piling up on the UX turns because the plane isn't in SFO to make the next turn is when the 2 hr delay turns into 3-5hrs and canx etc. because the plane can't get to SFO to make the next leg. That helps of course mainline stay on-time because it has a departure corridor slot which makes it appear like it favors mainline. While it appears this is a UA vs. UX thing it is more the FAA applying its regional ground stop rule and disproportionately affecting UX in Cali. etc. At least that's how it was a bit ago. Now how UX recovers from that and handles customer service...well search the threads lol.

moral of the story, to get into SFO leave on the 5am flight, odds are pretty good if the plane makes it in the night before without fog.

sbm12

I thought the at risk flights were gone at this point.

jsloan

If so, I hadn't heard about it, but I could easily have missed it.

MBS MillionMiler

sbm12

Indeed...more than I thought are still operated at risk. Here's a list from .nut:
For United Express flight numbers range from 5000-5175

From SFO:
ONT - Ontario, CA
OTH - North Bend, OR
PSC - Pasco, WA
SBP - San Luis Obispo, CA
SMF - Sacramento, CA

From LAX:
MRY - Monterey, CA
SBA - Santa Barbara, CA

From DEN:
DVL - Devils Lake, ND
GCC - Gillette, WY
HYS - Hays, KS
JMS - Jamestown, ND
LAR - Laramie, WY
RKS - Rock Springs, WY
SGU - St George, UT

From ORD:
AVL - Asheville, NC
CMX - Houghton/Hancock, MI
DLH - Duluth, MN
EAU - Eau Claire, WI
FWA - Fort Wayne, IN
MBS - Saginaw, MI
MKG - Muskegon, MI
PAH - Paducah, KY
SPI - Springfield, IL

mduell

I believe the at-risk discussion is entirely orthogonal to OP's stated question, since the slots are still UA managed.