Could COVID be UA’s opportunity to order the 777X?
Jul 21, 2021, 12:21 pm
#46
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco/Tel Aviv/YYZ
Programs: CO 1K-MM
Posts: 10,762
Let's be absolutely clear about WHY the 777X is rapidly proving to be a dud -- the type (esp the 779) offers zero upside over widebody a/c types currently in the marketplace. Boeing lists a seating capacity of just 414(!) seats (42J + 372Y) for the 779 -- this is due to the aircraft's design and door placements, and cannot be easily shifted upward. Realistically, with a sizable Premium Economy cabin AND some Economy Plus seating, the 779 will carry few/no more pax than today's 77Ws/A350s, and the 779 will carry a much higher price tag and a host of new tech headaches.
Oh, and the 779 has slightly LESS range than the prior generation 777-300ER!
One of the few things UA has gotten right in its fleet planning is staying far away from the 777X.
Oh, and the 779 has slightly LESS range than the prior generation 777-300ER!
One of the few things UA has gotten right in its fleet planning is staying far away from the 777X.
Jul 21, 2021, 1:17 pm
#47
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
Yes. After a terrible SFO-TPE flight (#1 on the upgrade waitlist, never cleared) stuck for 14 hours in a narrow 16" seat, I'm never flying again in a 10-abreast 777 unless I'm in paid business/premium plus, or an upgrade clears at time of booking. It's much worse than the already bad 787 in Y.
Jul 21, 2021, 9:01 pm
#48
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: SJC
Programs: Southwest, Alaska, United, American Airlines
Posts: 994
Jul 21, 2021, 9:33 pm
#49
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,855
and at least 12% to 30% fewer seats in a two class config (the 426 seats is 779 in two class config), so need to compare apples to apples
And a similiar amount less cargo space.
And a similiar amount less cargo space.
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Jul 21, 2021 at 9:45 pm Reason: cargo
Jul 22, 2021, 2:04 am
#50
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,126
Current configurations from SeatGuru:
789 (UA) — 257 seats
781 (UA) — 318 seats
77W (UA) — 350 seats
359 (DL) — 306 seats
359 (SK) — 300 seats
359 (LH) — 293 or 319 seats
789 (UA) — 257 seats
781 (UA) — 318 seats
77W (UA) — 350 seats
359 (DL) — 306 seats
359 (SK) — 300 seats
359 (LH) — 293 or 319 seats
Last edited by JimInOhio; Jul 22, 2021 at 2:17 am
Jul 22, 2021, 7:20 am
#51
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693
Jul 23, 2021, 5:06 pm
#52
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2020
Posts: 19
The easiest thing for UA to do with the RR order is just to pay the penalty for terminating the contract. Having 2 separate engines is a logistical nightmare, there are different operating procedures for each engine, different overhaul procedures, different parts, different maintenance schedules, etc. It is also RR's own fault for backing themselves exclusively into the widebody market and essentially onto one plane.
Nope, its not as easy at it seems, in the long term it would be much cheaper to pay the contract termination penalty. The real bonkers move is when they increased their order to 45 A350s.
Nope, its not as easy at it seems, in the long term it would be much cheaper to pay the contract termination penalty. The real bonkers move is when they increased their order to 45 A350s.
Last edited by UA857; Aug 22, 2021 at 3:18 am