Why fly crummy E175 on IAH-LGA?
Nov 26, 2019, 6:28 am
#31
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,124
So, now the $64,000 question.....
I have to fly the exact same route next month. My effective choices are UA or WN on this route. Based upon the recent terrible experience on UA, I am 99.999% certain that I will buy WN for that trip. Is there any reason that I shouldn't? Again, they fly the HOU-LGA an HOU-BDL routes, which will more than suite me (my current assignment is in central Connecticut.)
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of UA, and this latest experience pretty much was the last straw. I am disgusted with them - particularly with their lack of planning and organization, which made the last trip much worse. It is clear that many of their personnel - particularly ground personnel, baggage, food service, etc. - just don't care, so why should I?
I have to fly the exact same route next month. My effective choices are UA or WN on this route. Based upon the recent terrible experience on UA, I am 99.999% certain that I will buy WN for that trip. Is there any reason that I shouldn't? Again, they fly the HOU-LGA an HOU-BDL routes, which will more than suite me (my current assignment is in central Connecticut.)
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of UA, and this latest experience pretty much was the last straw. I am disgusted with them - particularly with their lack of planning and organization, which made the last trip much worse. It is clear that many of their personnel - particularly ground personnel, baggage, food service, etc. - just don't care, so why should I?
BTW, are you 99.999% certain WN flies the HOU-BDL route?
More important, if you're trying to get to central Connecticut, isn't taking the IAH-BDL flight your best option by far? There's no need to go to LGA at all.
Nov 26, 2019, 7:42 am
#32
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: D/FW
Programs: DL MM/Silver; UA 1K ; Hilton Gold; Marriott Titanium; Avis Pref+,Hertz PC
Posts: 585
Although I might miss the hot food in F, I'd take the E75 any day over a 737/319 in terms of seat comfort. But man, they have do something about the almost nonexistent overhead bin on the right side in F.
Nov 26, 2019, 7:59 am
#33
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K, Hyatt Globalist, Virtuoso Travel Agent, Commercial Pilot
Posts: 2,117
Under federal law, airport operators can't base most fees on the type of operation (e.g. route), but a lot of the incentives you describe are already part of the fee structure. For example, many airports charge a two-component landing fee that has a base per-operation fee, then a variable fee based on weight. The per-operation fee is the same for an A380 and a CRJ-200, so on a per-seat basis it's advantageous to use larger aircraft. Having said that, in the US airport operators also cannot charge more than is necessary to operate the airport, so this is still a relatively small expense so it doesn't really move the needle. But, pretty much all of the economics favor larger aircraft if you can fill the seats, so those incentives already exist ... but in many cases airlines determine frequency is more important.
Nov 26, 2019, 8:00 am
#34
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: DEN
Programs: UA MM Plat; AA MM Gold; HHonors Diamond
Posts: 15,866
Nov 26, 2019, 9:46 am
#36
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 129
No, it was a completely miserable flight, despite the fact that United refused to stick an inferior 737/A319 over the E175 on this route.
Yes, there are some advantages to the 737/A319 — most notably, hot food. However, in my opinion, the E175 is far more comfortable in Y, and similar in F, than the narrowbody mainline fleet.
The other things you mentioned — including weight / balance issues — could have happened on any plane.
Yes, there are some advantages to the 737/A319 — most notably, hot food. However, in my opinion, the E175 is far more comfortable in Y, and similar in F, than the narrowbody mainline fleet.
The other things you mentioned — including weight / balance issues — could have happened on any plane.
Nov 26, 2019, 9:49 am
#37
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: TPA
Programs: United MP
Posts: 463
Large, congested airports should price their landing fees in a manner that incentivizes airlines to fly higher-capacity aircraft in markets that can support a larger plane. Using LGA as an example:
Small city to LGA: $ landing fee
Medium city to LGA: $$ landing fee
Large city to LGA (using a 175+ seat plane): $$$ landing fee
Large city to LGA (using a 130-174 seat plane): $$$$$$$$$ landing fee
Large city to LGA (using a sub-130 seat plane): $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ landing fee
Landing fee exemptions (or discounts) could be made available to all airlines for the first 2 flights/day, for example, between each large city pair... so as to not harm smaller, entrant carriers who have a limited presence. That aside, in this simple (and exaggerated) model, a large carrier running multiple flights per day between a large city and LGA would face a significant financial penalty if the carrier opted to use a small aircraft on the route. And that financial penalty, if significant enough, could force a change in scheduling behavior... resulting in reduced congestion, fewer delays, and more reliable service overall... which would be a net gain for travelers even with the likely frequency reduction that would occur in several popular markets.
Small city to LGA: $ landing fee
Medium city to LGA: $$ landing fee
Large city to LGA (using a 175+ seat plane): $$$ landing fee
Large city to LGA (using a 130-174 seat plane): $$$$$$$$$ landing fee
Large city to LGA (using a sub-130 seat plane): $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ landing fee
Landing fee exemptions (or discounts) could be made available to all airlines for the first 2 flights/day, for example, between each large city pair... so as to not harm smaller, entrant carriers who have a limited presence. That aside, in this simple (and exaggerated) model, a large carrier running multiple flights per day between a large city and LGA would face a significant financial penalty if the carrier opted to use a small aircraft on the route. And that financial penalty, if significant enough, could force a change in scheduling behavior... resulting in reduced congestion, fewer delays, and more reliable service overall... which would be a net gain for travelers even with the likely frequency reduction that would occur in several popular markets.
So, now the $64,000 question.....
I have to fly the exact same route next month. My effective choices are UA or WN on this route. Based upon the recent terrible experience on UA, I am 99.999% certain that I will buy WN for that trip. Is there any reason that I shouldn't? Again, they fly the HOU-LGA an HOU-BDL routes, which will more than suite me (my current assignment is in central Connecticut.)
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of UA, and this latest experience pretty much was the last straw. I am disgusted with them - particularly with their lack of planning and organization, which made the last trip much worse. It is clear that many of their personnel - particularly ground personnel, baggage, food service, etc. - just don't care, so why should I?
I have to fly the exact same route next month. My effective choices are UA or WN on this route. Based upon the recent terrible experience on UA, I am 99.999% certain that I will buy WN for that trip. Is there any reason that I shouldn't? Again, they fly the HOU-LGA an HOU-BDL routes, which will more than suite me (my current assignment is in central Connecticut.)
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of UA, and this latest experience pretty much was the last straw. I am disgusted with them - particularly with their lack of planning and organization, which made the last trip much worse. It is clear that many of their personnel - particularly ground personnel, baggage, food service, etc. - just don't care, so why should I?
As far as the E175 argument goes my only complaint is the generally slower cruise speed. I took one from IAH to BZN last year and it felt like it took forever.
Nov 26, 2019, 10:28 am
#38
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NYC
Programs: UA-1K MM, AA-Gold, DL-Silver, AS-MVP
Posts: 2,508
I have to fly the exact same route next month. My effective choices are UA or WN on this route. Based upon the recent terrible experience on UA, I am 99.999% certain that I will buy WN for that trip. Is there any reason that I shouldn't? Again, they fly the HOU-LGA an HOU-BDL routes, which will more than suite me (my current assignment is in central Connecticut.)
UA flies LGA-IAH 8x daily and BDL-IAH 1x daily (on E175)
WN flies LGA-HOU 3x daily.
Nov 26, 2019, 10:41 am
#39
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Austin, TX - AUS
Programs: AA Platinum, Hilton, Hyatt, IHG, Marriott
Posts: 1,625
Why does United fly this tiny plane on this 1600 mile route? Do they really have that little business? Is WN and AA completely kicking their butts in the NYC market? Is it either this, or drop the LGA routes, like they did with JFK?
I was on an IAH-LGA flight on Saturday. It was delayed due to the weight restrictions caused by the jet stream dipping south. At first, the pilot threatened to offload half of the customers. He wanted 30 persons to take an alternate flight out of Newark. Not enough people took the offer. So instead, he decided to fly to Savannah (SAV) of all places. We then had to fly west back to IAH.
(The flight was even more miserable than that. The lavs ran out of potable water. The flight attendants ran out of food and drinks. There was no catering crew in SAV to re-cater the plane. An engine light came on, and we had to wait an extra hour, for a maintenance person to come out, and check out the light. Predictably, it turned out to be nothing. We arrived five hours later into IAH. And to put a cherry on top of it, the bags came off the wrong carousel, after which the lazy personnel in IAH baggage claim didn't even both to announce the proper carousel to get our bags. God, those people suck.)
All in all, it was a completely miserably flight, all because United refuses to use a 737 or A319 when flying this route - into the nation's biggest city. It makes no sense - like most of what transpires on this airline.
This is the last damned time that I take a E175 cross country. I am done with this. If I have to switch to WN to avoid this, I will.
I was on an IAH-LGA flight on Saturday. It was delayed due to the weight restrictions caused by the jet stream dipping south. At first, the pilot threatened to offload half of the customers. He wanted 30 persons to take an alternate flight out of Newark. Not enough people took the offer. So instead, he decided to fly to Savannah (SAV) of all places. We then had to fly west back to IAH.
(The flight was even more miserable than that. The lavs ran out of potable water. The flight attendants ran out of food and drinks. There was no catering crew in SAV to re-cater the plane. An engine light came on, and we had to wait an extra hour, for a maintenance person to come out, and check out the light. Predictably, it turned out to be nothing. We arrived five hours later into IAH. And to put a cherry on top of it, the bags came off the wrong carousel, after which the lazy personnel in IAH baggage claim didn't even both to announce the proper carousel to get our bags. God, those people suck.)
All in all, it was a completely miserably flight, all because United refuses to use a 737 or A319 when flying this route - into the nation's biggest city. It makes no sense - like most of what transpires on this airline.
This is the last damned time that I take a E175 cross country. I am done with this. If I have to switch to WN to avoid this, I will.
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of UA, and this latest experience pretty much was the last straw. I am disgusted with them - particularly with their lack of planning and organization, which made the last trip much worse. It is clear that many of their personnel - particularly ground personnel, baggage, food service, etc. - just don't care, so why should I?
Last edited by Austin787; Nov 26, 2019 at 10:49 am
Nov 26, 2019, 10:44 am
#40
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: TX
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 729
(emphasis added). This is why you flew south to Savannah before turning west. Given the upper level winds, it was the fastest route.
Nov 26, 2019, 11:42 am
#41
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CT/NY
Programs: UA 1K/1MM, AA EXP, Marriott LT Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Plat Amb
Posts: 6,020
But there are mainline flights between IAH and LGA. 
Probably because there is only 1 nonstop on United. There may be more to greater Houston, but availability is greater out of LGA and EWR. I would have suggested HPN, but there are no nonstops to IAH.
LGA has a rule on how far AC can fly with a limit of 1500 miles except for flights to DEN and flights on Saturdays. This incentivises airlines to use more smaller planes on shorter routes and keeps the larger planes at EWR and JFK where they have better infrastructure.
If you are working in central CT I don't know why you wouldn't fly in/out of BDL regardless of carrier.
As far as the E175 argument goes my only complaint is the generally slower cruise speed. I took one from IAH to BZN last year and it felt like it took forever.
If you are working in central CT I don't know why you wouldn't fly in/out of BDL regardless of carrier.
As far as the E175 argument goes my only complaint is the generally slower cruise speed. I took one from IAH to BZN last year and it felt like it took forever.
Nov 26, 2019, 11:45 am
#42
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: USA
Programs: 1K 1MM; Bonvoy Ambassador; Nat'l EE; Hertz PC; Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 2,465
319/320 > E75 >>>>>>> 737
Go fly AA on a CR9 where you're FORCED to gate check bags (even though bins fit bags), receive terrible service, and will most likely arrive an hour late.
Go fly AA on a CR9 where you're FORCED to gate check bags (even though bins fit bags), receive terrible service, and will most likely arrive an hour late.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Nov 26, 2019 at 1:18 pm Reason: discuss the issue; not the poster(s)
Dec 2, 2019, 10:51 am
#45
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
A 767 is about the only thing I would rather fly in Y than an E75, certainly among UA's fleet options. On a 100% full flight, I might actually prefer the E45 in Y.
No middle seats, reasonable width, good bulkhead... the only thing not to like is they are more likely to have IRROPS.
Do you have status for free E+ and/or want to pay for a better guaranteed seat than normal Economy? If not, I don't understand why anyone would choose an airline other than Southwest unless the price difference is substantial. I find the no-status Y experience on WN to be vastly superior to any other carrier I have flown.
No middle seats, reasonable width, good bulkhead... the only thing not to like is they are more likely to have IRROPS.
I have to fly the exact same route next month. My effective choices are UA or WN on this route. Based upon the recent terrible experience on UA, I am 99.999% certain that I will buy WN for that trip. Is there any reason that I shouldn't? Again, they fly the HOU-LGA an HOU-BDL routes, which will more than suite me (my current assignment is in central Connecticut.)
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of UA, and this latest experience pretty much was the last straw. I am disgusted with them - particularly with their lack of planning and organization, which made the last trip much worse. It is clear that many of their personnel - particularly ground personnel, baggage, food service, etc. - just don't care, so why should I?
Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of UA, and this latest experience pretty much was the last straw. I am disgusted with them - particularly with their lack of planning and organization, which made the last trip much worse. It is clear that many of their personnel - particularly ground personnel, baggage, food service, etc. - just don't care, so why should I?