PaulInTheSky

No I was talking about SFO-SIN 8446 miles and EWR-HKG as 8065 miles.

The difference between these two routes is roughly 400 miles

sbm12

UPS was flying less than daily (4x weekly) and will maintain a single weekly flight based on filings. And those allocations are cargo-only. UA's request comes from a different pool of slots, though that doesn't mean the demand isn't driven by the UPS move in some manner.

For now the UA operation is a tag from LAX but that could shift once pax service starts up again. Or not.
Not really a smokescreen when the filing explicitly states that the initial traffic is precisely that, with the 5th freedom stuff coming later.

UA_Flyer

HKG-SIN-HKG were there since the beginning of the 90s. I still remember taking off from the old HK airport in the city during the evening on the HKG-SIN flights. Pending on the direction of the wind, if you are lucky, the plane would fly just meters above some of the tall buildings in Kowloon....fabulous views.

Digging through my flight details from my early 90s flight activities. HKG-SIN-HKG is a tag from the LAX-HKG-LAX flight, i.e. same flight number for LAX-HKG-SIN, and same for SIN-HKG-LAX (Flight # 1 and 2 were used).

Once UA introduced RTW flights using HKG to connect to/from DEL and took the numbers 1 and 2 for RTW flight numbers, the HKG-SIN-HKG became a tag for SFO-HKG-SFO flights using flight numbers 805 and 806.

When PMUA took its first handful of 744s, the planes were deployed to the HKG flights, and HKG-SIN-HKG were flown on the 744 as result.

At one time, perhaps around the turn of this century, HKG-SIN-HKG was replaced with HKG-BKK-HKG for a while. Not sure the reasons were, perhaps the demand was low and HKG overnight fee was high, and UA used the same 744 for the BKK service.

If UA does go ahead with passenger services on the HKG-SIN route (big if, IMHO), I will be more than happy to get on it.

I had done more NRT-SIN on the 744 than the 777! Regardless which aircraft was used, I much prefer NRT-SIN than HKG-SIN when connecting from the US for the following reasons:

1. HKG-SIN flight is too short to sleep after a long flight from the US. Once meal service is over, there is only about 90 min left on the flight.
2. NRT-SIN is a 6-hour flight and I can get decent rest before landing in SIN.
3. NRT showers and beer machine at RCC/UC.
4. Better garlic breads on flights out of NRT and better overall catering.
5. One of the US-HKG flights was often delayed, so getting a late delayed flight to SIN out of HKG is quite common.
6. On the return leg, SIN-HKG leaves at 6 am and NRT flight leaves after 7 am. On extra hours sleep in SIN.

BTW, I had stayed in the same Conrad Hotel as you did. Perhaps we might have run into each other at the hotel, SIN/HKG/NRT or sat next to each other on the same flights

Just realized the HKG-SIN Discussion is better placed in the HKF-SIN cargo thread.

jsloan

Local traffic on HKG-SIN definitely would not have been included in the joint venture. Only TPAC travelers are included.

In the current environment, I suspect they'd sit it.

The purpose of HKG-SIN was never to try to capture local traffic. Yes, they'd sell those tickets, but the reason they flew the route was twofold: First, to provide service to Singapore before they had a plane capable of making it nonstop from the US, and second, to allow the morning / morning schedule that they wanted without having to park the plane overnight at HKG, which is expensive.

CALMSP

I know most like to simply bash Smisek, but lets be honest, he has zero part of changing an airplane in network planning.

dkc192

If they were to run a SFO-HKG-SIN and vice versa flight, I hope that they'd run a schedule based on UA877/878 and closely resembling SQ1/2--AKA evening/night flights overwater--rather than the miserable old schedule they ran (UA895/896). UA877 "currently" arrives HKG around 6am, and could arrive in SIN by noon at the latest as a tag flight. The return, UA878, could then leave SIN as early as 2pm, arriving into HKG at 6pm and continuing to SFO at 7:30pm. It could also leave SIN later to match the "current" ex-HKG timing of UA878 (10:30pm).

garykung

Maybe, but definitely had something to do with pmCO.

Before the merger, UA used 744/772 to run ORD-HKG-SIN and SFO-HKG-SGN. It did not really a matter whether the demand actually supported the routes. The fact was none of the UA aircraft stayed overnight in HKG.

Then the merger.

Someone at pmCO Corporate had a brilliant idea - let's utilize the GUM 737 more. So the widebodies stayed overnight, i.e. ORD-HKG and SFO-HKG only. Instead, UA pulled one of the GUM 737 to NRT and the routes became NRT-HKG-SIN and GUM-HKG-SGN. The problem was HKG-NRT was highly competitive, especially given the LCC. Even DL pulled its HKG-NRT-MSP route (using 767). Obviously UA did not succeed. But because UA did not want to use a widebody again. So when NRT-HKG was canceled, HKG-SIN got canceled at the same time (as the only U.S. carrier flying to Vietnam, as well as less competition, HKG-SGN was more sustainable than HKG-SIN at that time).

Sure - SMI/J might not be the guy calling the shot. But to say pmCO had no involvement, it would not be plausible.

The way I see it - so far, by purportedly improving GUM, UA has successfully screwed up GUM market even more than ever.

seenitall

And how do you know the traffic loads and fare yields justified a widebody over a 737?

kevflyer

If this happens, SFO-HKG upgrades will be very hard to come by.

uastarflyer

The success of SFO-SIN answers this. Quickly retreating from Smisek’s folly is another point.

garykung

Even Scoot used 787 (previously 772) for HKG-SIN before COVID-19.

DELee

Wonder how long the list of SMI/J follies would be if we had to enumerate them....

David

uastarflyer

We’d need another server to manage the list.

CALMSP

well, I never mentioned anything about pmCO, simply that Smisek had absolutely nothing to do with scheduling a 738 HKG-SIN. Lots of things changed with the merger, including a focus on "where can we make more money". Which meant, okay, we can make a couple million on one previously flown route or we can open this other route with that wide body that can generate a couple million x2.

WineCountryUA

Can we get back to the new information about SIN-HKG -- cargo route and maybe passenger service. What happened 5 years ago does really seem to be of any significance to today -- other than UA travelers have long memories. I'm more interested in where things are going and not what happened in the distant past.