Why not a LAX/SFO-SYD double daily?

Old Dec 28, 2018, 8:38 am
  #31  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC
Programs: Marriott Platinum Elite, National Executive, United Gold
Posts: 1,181
UA has already figured out the long-term replacement for the 77Es: the A359 and 787-10.

I don't think there is any doubt Boeing, GE and RR are working hard to get more capabilities out of the 787-8 and 787-9 (and Airbus working with RR on the A359) as I think market participants have figured out ~250 passengers is probably the optimal capacity/payload for ULR aircraft.

Originally Posted by jsloan
The 777-8 might be able to do it. UA doesn’t currently have any orders for it, but Boeing will be pushing it hard as UA attempts to figure out the long-term replacement for the current 772s.
764toHI is offline  
Old Dec 28, 2018, 8:49 am
  #32  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,309
As somebody who has actually seen the numbers, LAS is one of the top destinations for Australians visiting the U.S. Orlando/ Disney World too!

Originally Posted by mahasamatman
If that's true, they're only staying in LA because that's where the flights go. Many/most of those people will continue to their desired destinations after a day or two. And I would certainly not assume Las Vegas is a big attraction to Australians.
jasondc is offline  
Old Dec 28, 2018, 9:24 am
  #33  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
Originally Posted by jasondc
As somebody who has actually seen the numbers, LAS is one of the top destinations for Australians visiting the U.S. Orlando/ Disney World too!
punting is one of their pastimes. Melbourne cup is a public holiday in Vic after all
prestonh is offline  
Old Dec 28, 2018, 2:00 pm
  #34  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Crystal City, VA
Programs: United Mileage Plus 1K 2 MM, HHonors Diamond, Hyatt Platinum
Posts: 2,627
Hope they keep the IAH-SYD flights. Handy from Washington DC, one can grab a DCA-IAH flight after work and enjoy the 17.5 h ride to SYD from IAH. Enough time to eat, sleep, watch movies, and work!
mauiUAflyer is offline  
Old Dec 29, 2018, 12:42 am
  #35  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,102
Originally Posted by 764toHI
UA has already figured out the long-term replacement for the 77Es: the A359 and 787-10.

I don't think there is any doubt Boeing, GE and RR are working hard to get more capabilities out of the 787-8 and 787-9 (and Airbus working with RR on the A359) as I think market participants have figured out ~250 passengers is probably the optimal capacity/payload for ULR aircraft.
I will believe that UA will fly the A359 on the day of the inaugural, and not a moment before.

It seems abundantly clear that UA is looking to replace the A350 order with a Boeing order as soon as they can make the finances work.
jsloan is online now  
Old Dec 29, 2018, 4:41 am
  #36  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: IAH, YYC
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 747
So it seems like the curfew is the biggest barrier to making a double daily work, which makes sense.

Im surprised there isn’t more capacity on NA-AUS routes generally though. If someone has the data on this I’d love to be corrected, but it seems capacity adds from AC, UA, QF, AA and DL are getting absorbed without much in the way of price reductions on those routes. It’s only in the last 6 months that I’ve seen sub C$1,300 pricing in Y on my regular YYC-SYD flight. Whereas HKG, SIN, TPE etc are usually sub C$800 for the same distance, and in some cases worse aircraft utilization with an overnight stop.

also, I can confirm from anecdotal evidence that LAS is extremely popular for Australians, at least with all my old high school friends here.
david_oz is offline  
Old Dec 29, 2018, 6:20 am
  #37  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 8,932
Originally Posted by jsloan

I will believe that UA will fly the A359 on the day of the inaugural, and not a moment before.

It seems abundantly clear that UA is looking to replace the A350 order with a Boeing order as soon as they can make the finances work.
What is UA going to replace the A359 with? My impression was that UA felt the 777X line was too large for its needs. I dont see the Dreamliner being the optimal replacement either (the 78J cant do any East Coast-Asia TPACs, while the 789 would be a meaningful reduction in capacity).

I sure hope UA keeps the A359 order, but for practical reasons, I dont see what else they would use instead.
PsiFighter37 is offline  
Old Dec 29, 2018, 11:09 am
  #38  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: MSP
Programs: DL PM, UA Gold, WN, Global Entry; +others wherever miles/points are found
Posts: 14,284
Originally Posted by david_oz
Im surprised there isn’t more capacity on NA-AUS routes generally though. If someone has the data on this I’d love to be corrected, but it seems capacity adds from AC, UA, QF, AA and DL are getting absorbed without much in the way of price reductions on those routes. It’s only in the last 6 months that I’ve seen sub C$1,300 pricing in Y on my regular YYC-SYD flight. Whereas HKG, SIN, TPE etc are usually sub C$800 for the same distance, and in some cases worse aircraft utilization with an overnight stop.
I assume you mean round-trip? C$800 is an insanely low price, corresponding to a USD RASM of something like 0.035. Asia prices are getting driven by the introduction of routes from the new Chinese carriers, among other things. I really doubt anyone is in a hurry to dump seats so they can push the US-ANZ market below $1,000 r/t prices.
jasondc likes this.
findark is offline  
Old Dec 31, 2018, 12:25 am
  #39  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 21,102
Originally Posted by PsiFighter37
What is UA going to replace the A359 with? My impression was that UA felt the 777X line was too large for its needs. I dont see the Dreamliner being the optimal replacement either (the 78J cant do any East Coast-Asia TPACs, while the 789 would be a meaningful reduction in capacity).

I sure hope UA keeps the A359 order, but for practical reasons, I dont see what else they would use instead.
My speculation is that theyre working through that with Boeing. The A359 isnt exactly a low-capacity aircraft; Im not sure theres that much of a capacity difference between the A359 and the 777-8, depending upon the variant and class configuration. Obviously, a lot depends upon the particular missions they have in mind. Suffice it to say, every indication that UA has given in the last 5 years or so is that their long-term plans favor a Boeing focus.
jsloan is online now  
Old Dec 31, 2018, 4:04 am
  #40  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: NYC (Primarily EWR)
Programs: UA 1K / *G, Marriott Bonvoy Gold; Avis PC
Posts: 8,932
Originally Posted by jsloan

My speculation is that theyre working through that with Boeing. The A359 isnt exactly a low-capacity aircraft; Im not sure theres that much of a capacity difference between the A359 and the 777-8, depending upon the variant and class configuration. Obviously, a lot depends upon the particular missions they have in mind. Suffice it to say, every indication that UA has given in the last 5 years or so is that their long-term plans favor a Boeing focus.
I dont disagree that UA clearly prefers Boeing. That said, it seems like the 777-9 is the only realistic replacement range-wise and within a similar timeframe as the current A359 order, and a 777-8 order (which makes the most sense) would be around 2 years (at least) after that. UA would need to get some extra juice out of their current fleet since they are planning to start 772 retirement in the next 3-4 years, I believe. 777-9 seats 400+ people...seems like too much plane no matter how you slice it (can ORD-PVG really support that many folks a day, for example?).
PsiFighter37 is offline  
Old Dec 31, 2018, 9:52 am
  #41  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
Originally Posted by jsloan

It seems abundantly clear that UA is looking to replace the A350 order with a Boeing order as soon as they can make the finances work.
It is rumored that UA can't get out of the high priced RR engine contract. It was in a financial presentation where previous mgt. was criticized for this. IDK if this is the real story so take it with a grain of salt. The fact that post BK ordered 78's and 77's have been flowing and the 359 have not says something though.

Originally Posted by PsiFighter37
I dont disagree that UA clearly prefers Boeing. That said, it seems like the 777-9 is the only realistic replacement range-wise and within a similar timeframe as the current A359 order, and a 777-8 order (which makes the most sense) would be around 2 years (at least) after that. UA would need to get some extra juice out of their current fleet since they are planning to start 772 retirement in the next 3-4 years, I believe. 777-9 seats 400+ people...seems like too much plane no matter how you slice it (can ORD-PVG really support that many folks a day, for example?).
I think UA prefers a rationalized common fleet post BK for the best deal they can get. Just like DL is migrating their widebodies to DL (except for the 77L's for the range back then) UA has the Boeing widebodies. By buying them 10-15 at a time they seem to be getting the best deals without shocking their investors/financials and huge financial commitments. IDK if UA needs the 779, for capacity they can send 2X 788 or 789 like they do to SIN, NRT, FRA, LHR etc. from the same/multiple hubs at different times for the same/similar seat cost. If/when PIP's come the 787-10 could make the range/economics quite comparable as a 772 replacement. That is probably why you don't see UA panicking.
prestonh is offline  
Old Jan 2, 2019, 10:37 am
  #42  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bellingham/Gainesville
Programs: UA-G MM, Priority Club Platinum, Avis First, Hertz 5*, Red Lion
Posts: 2,808
Originally Posted by jsloan

I mean, I guess thats possible, but LAX-SIN was the longest 789 flight, and it came with some pretty significant load restrictions westbound. Theyd need nearly 5% more effective range to run ORD-SYD than they needed for LAX-SIN (based on great circle distances, not ETOPS-certified flight plans). If there is a PIP that can generate a 5% fuel economy improvement, I guarantee UA would be all over it.

The 777-200LR might be able to make this distance, and the 350-900ULR definitely could; its shorter than EWR-SIN. But UA has neither.

The 777-8 might be able to do it. UA doesnt currently have any orders for it, but Boeing will be pushing it hard as UA attempts to figure out the long-term replacement for the current 772s.
I've read there are 3 PIP's planned for the GE engines with 2.5-3.5% fuel burn cut with each PIP.
jsloan likes this.
prestonh 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.