New UA Destinations coming soon Rumors

Old Apr 19, 2018, 10:11 am
  #91  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: TPE
Programs: UA Gold, HA Premier, Hertz #1 Gold PC, SBUX Gold
Posts: 603
TG has been in the news on and off since last fall as planning on re-instating service to the US, likely either to SFO or LAX. Of course FAA has to raise Thailand's rating again first which Europe has already done so it should happen. Someone mentioned it above, but I wonder whether UA introducing BKK might also then entice TG to re-enter the market as it did SG with SIN. I for one would welcome multiple *A service choices to BKK. Used to be a regular on the TG flight from LAX to BKK at least twice per year, and it also provided very convenient transfers to SW China and KMG where I often need to travel to. I agree with others demand is there and with the almost flooding of the market for SIN now with multiple carriers, seems just a matter of time for someone to reinstate BKK.
gradsflyer is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 10:16 am
  #92  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CLE
Programs: UA 1K MM, DL Plat
Posts: 982
Originally Posted by east_west
BR61 (TPE->BKK) departs TPE at 10:30pm, this gives you ~4 hours layover in TPE from UA871.
BR206 (BKK->TPE) arrives TPE at 6:35am, this gives you ~3 hours layover in TPE to UA872.

Both flights are lie-flat 777-300ERs, can be had for about $850 in J and $300 in Y.
I would challenge you to go ahead and try to book that (at those prices, or anything even remotely close) on the same PNR. If you care about UA PQDs, I would challenge you further to not just book it, but do so on a 016 ticket.

And while those connection times do seem quite reasonable on their surface, UA 871's rather dismal performance history makes it a little scarier than I like in my life...

EDIT: Per restlessinRNO's post below, I forgot that the summer and winter schedules were different. My last 3 flights to BKK have been on the winter schedule, when that connection time is much shorter!

Last edited by Darlox; Apr 19, 2018 at 10:54 am Reason: additional note
Darlox is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 10:45 am
  #93  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: RNO, NV, USA.
Programs: UA 2MM
Posts: 5,038
Originally Posted by east_west
BR61 (TPE->BKK) departs TPE at 10:30pm, this gives you ~4 hours layover in TPE from UA871.
BR206 (BKK->TPE) arrives TPE at 6:35am, this gives you ~3 hours layover in TPE to UA872.

Both flights are lie-flat 777-300ERs, can be had RT for about $850 in J and $300 in Y.
east_west - Thank you for your comments. Yes, currently BR61 does connect well to UA's 6:30 pm arrival, even when UA arrives late. This is not the case in the winter schedule though, when UA arrives 8 pm. BR206 is 1:45 am - 6:35 am. I try to avoid midnight flights, but I agree it does connect to UA872. Sadly, I get PQM but no PQD for these flights, as they are always on separate tickets.
restlessinRNO is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 10:50 am
  #94  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: PDX
Programs: AA LT PLT (3.6+ MM), UA 1K LT Gold, Hilton LT Diamond, Bonvoy Gold.
Posts: 1,655
Fingers and legs crossed for PDX <---> LAX. Come on UA!
timfountain is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 10:53 am
  #95  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NYC/WAS
Programs: UA GS, AA EXP, DL '90s PM, now FK (Flying Kettle)
Posts: 541
Originally Posted by gradsflyer
TG has been in the news on and off since last fall as planning on re-instating service to the US, likely either to SFO or LAX. Of course FAA has to raise Thailand's rating again first which Europe has already done so it should happen. Someone mentioned it above, but I wonder whether UA introducing BKK might also then entice TG to re-enter the market as it did SG with SIN. I for one would welcome multiple *A service choices to BKK. Used to be a regular on the TG flight from LAX to BKK at least twice per year, and it also provided very convenient transfers to SW China and KMG where I often need to travel to. I agree with others demand is there and with the almost flooding of the market for SIN now with multiple carriers, seems just a matter of time for someone to reinstate BKK.
TG not only did LAX-BKK but also JFK-BKK nonstop on the 340, and (unfortunately) couldn't make either one pay. I'd love to see UA do SFO-BKK, and I'd happily pay for J, but I don't think it's in the works.
AlreadyThere is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 10:53 am
  #96  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Programs: DYKWIA, But I'm a "Diamond Guest" UA 1K/2MM
Posts: 2,238
Originally Posted by timfountain
Fingers and legs crossed for PDX <---> LAX. Come on UA!
They just started MFR<->LAX (albeit on CRJ200s). So a PDX flight -- probably also a CRJ200 -- would not surprise me at all.
porciuscato is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 10:56 am
  #97  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: TLV
Programs: UA Platinum, Avis Chairman, Marriott Gold, Hilton Gold, GA Pilot
Posts: 3,225
Originally Posted by jasondc
The key distinction here is that UA had been in BKK for close to 30 years so knew the market pretty well, but hadn't been in the SFO - TLV market before.

Nice urban legend, but as I know the people who actually worked on the business case for this flight, I can guarantee you this is the stuff of legend that makes for good story telling. Airline route planners and sales people meet with interested groups all the time who talk to them about new route opportunities. When they see compelling ideas they may augment already-existing knowledge with the new stuff, but it's very rare that it's the main progenitor of such a route. Neat story though.

I, too, would love to see an IAD route. Time will tell.
I think I read that story in the newspaper. Now I'm not one to believe anything I read in the paper, especially the Israeli paper, but there must have been some miscalculation on their part if they went from 3x weekly with a 787 to daily with a 777-300 within 18 months of launching the route.
NYTA is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 12:03 pm
  #98  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,309
I've worked in this type of forecasting at varioius airlines, and can tell you from experience that generally forecasts are kept conservative. Sometimes the actual flight does poorly, sometimes way better than expected. When they do really well, you add more capacity if you have the equipment and you believe that there is enough demand to absorb the capacity at the yield you need. Other times you're more cautious. That's kind of normal, and doesnt necessarily corroborate this story or deny it, it just is typical for a a long-haul, untested route.

Originally Posted by NYTA
I think I read that story in the newspaper. Now I'm not one to believe anything I read in the paper, especially the Israeli paper, but there must have been some miscalculation on their part if they went from 3x weekly with a 787 to daily with a 777-300 within 18 months of launching the route.
jasondc is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 12:09 pm
  #99  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 402
Originally Posted by NYTA
I think I read that story in the newspaper. Now I'm not one to believe anything I read in the paper, especially the Israeli paper, but there must have been some miscalculation on their part if they went from 3x weekly with a 787 to daily with a 777-300 within 18 months of launching the route.
I can assure you that no airline, just launches a 3 weekly long haul 787 route just to see how it goes. Which is what you implied earlier. New routes are methodically thought out.

Now having said that, I'm sure you're aware of the "Southwest Effect" Essentially a change in the market demand based on a new entrant into a city pair. It is entirely plausible, that based on information at hand, United determined that 3 weekly was sufficient to start. And it is just as likely that after initiating the nonstop, new business and tourist links between the Bay Area and Israel exploded which were unanticipated. Especially given there are little onward connection opportunities on either end.
jasondc likes this.
airzim is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 12:25 pm
  #100  
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,413
Originally Posted by williambruno1975
whats this obsession with BKK ?
There was a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG multi page thread when UA dropped BKK, and the discussion was quite heated. I'm sure many regular posters still remember it.

Originally Posted by Darlox

It's still a major market (I personally am there 2-4 times per year), and while everything you say is true, its location and the relationship UA has with its *A partners makes it _intensely_ annoying to get to. We can just go ahead and write off PEK and PVG -- if you willingly transit there, you deserve what you get.
I too fly to Thailand two to four times a year, and it's a major pain

Originally Posted by goodeats21

BKK is a pretty major destination, and the obsession is the same as everyone else's: To get to the destination in the most comfortable, efficient manner and hopefully use United and our earned benefits.

ANA is not a comfortable option (especially in economy), and it is a 6.5 hour flight. Unfortunately, the JV means this is the route that United wants to funnel people. Using HKG / TPE / SIN, etc means either paying a huge premium (due to plating restrictions/Fare rules) or assuming a lot of risk with booking separate tickets.
Exactly. It was like this before the JV as well IIRC, you simply could not buy a ticket that involved TG without it going to Y bucket and forcing a ridiculous price. And I for one would opt for TG over NH, five star airline

Though I concede that TG is exceptionally poorly run, coming to government for bailouts at regular intervals as well as other problems.
EmailKid is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 12:30 pm
  #101  
mr8
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Programs: UA1K | *A Gold
Posts: 767
Would love to see them bring back more fifth freedom flights! Crews used to seem more relaxed on these shorter international flights, and it makes it easier to connect from other cities in the US.
mr8 is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 12:34 pm
  #102  
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR and back on Van Isle ....... for now
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 14,413
Originally Posted by mr8
Would love to see them bring back more fifth freedom flights! Crews used to seem more relaxed on these shorter international flights, and it makes it easier to connect from other cities in the US.
I believe one of our regular posters went out on a limb a said "NO." OK, in so many words
EmailKid is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 1:15 pm
  #103  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Portland OR
Programs: United 1K 1MM, Marriott Bonvoy Platinum, Hilton HHonors Gold
Posts: 560
Originally Posted by mr8
Would love to see them bring back more fifth freedom flights! Crews used to seem more relaxed on these shorter international flights, and it makes it easier to connect from other cities in the US.
At a time when the US Big 3 are trying to stop/prevent the ME3 from doing fifth freedoms to the US, that would come across a bit hypocritical.
jasondc and tuolumne like this.
usbusinesstraveller is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 2:00 pm
  #104  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: In btw SJC & SFO
Programs: Marriott Titanium & LTP, Hilton Diamond (Aspire card), Hyatt Globalist, UA Gold (almost free agent)
Posts: 510
Originally Posted by porciuscato
Not going to happen. For all the complaints here, UA management isn't stupid. They stick to routes where they don't have to compete -- preferably where they're shielded from competition by the U.S. govt.

No way they're going to start routes where they have to compete with airlines (Singapore, Cathay, Thai, et al) that actually offer great service (vs. lame service from crusty union hacks). That's why they dropped service from HKG and NRT to BKK, SGN, and SIN.
Based on your logic, UA would have never operated LAX/SFO - SIN. I believe many UA elites would prefer UA due to PQD and to less extent LT BIS miles. As long UA provides lie flat and reasonable service, I'm all for it.
jasondc, tuolumne and JVPhoto like this.
tomwhom is offline  
Old Apr 19, 2018, 2:40 pm
  #105  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: TPE
Programs: UA Gold, HA Premier, Hertz #1 Gold PC, SBUX Gold
Posts: 603
Originally Posted by tomwhom
Based on your logic, UA would have never operated LAX/SFO - SIN. I believe many UA elites would prefer UA due to PQD and to less extent LT BIS miles. As long UA provides lie flat and reasonable service, I'm all for it.
And as far as I can tell UA has continued to perform with relatively decent loads on SFO - SIN even after the re-entry of SQ.
tuolumne and tomwhom like this.
gradsflyer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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.