Trip report, new SJC->IAD route
Nov 30, 1998, 9:05 pm
#1
Original Member
Original Poster
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 59
Trip report, new SJC->IAD route
I had a chance to try UA's new A3X service
out of San Jose(SJC) over the holidays.
I flew out of SJC instead of SFO in response to their double miles promo they've been having as part of flogging the new route, so
I bit.
Breakfast was better than usual for Y-class.
I haven't done a breakfast flight in a while,(If I'm going to blow a whole day going east, I'd rather get some sleep and leave later) so it was good to see some choice other than the mondo greasefest of eggs and sausage they seem to have. Small blueberry pancakes were available so I had those. Denny's quality, but still most digestible than usual.
I was bulkhead in the A320, my favorite spot
when I can't get up front. If you have to go
Y, 6A is not a bad spot 'cause of the extra
smidgen of legroom that's available from the
1st-class seats right in front of you.
Attendance was okay, maybe a bit thin compared to what I'm used to, esp. since I
tend to fly on '67s or DC-10s when I'm going out of SFO. They're kind of small, but I'd
still take them any day of the week over a
757.
I have to agree with the general commentary on the video fare. "Air Bud" hit a new low
for me in terms of movie offerings. On an
8AM flight out of Silicon Valley, this is
NOT the place to be showing a "family" movie.
There was hardly anybody on board that wasn't
nattering on about their company's impending IPO or tapping away on their laptop. Even though I was going to visit family, I still
spent most of the trip catching up on work.
If UA wants people to watch(read pay), I'd
ask that they consider somewhat more adult
fare. It doesn't even have to be all that NEW, just as long as it's not from the Disney
live-feature factory which obviously hasn't
seen a change in creative direction since
"The Boatniks"! in the late '60s.
Even being subjected to repeated showings
of "Speed II" on an Ansett SYD-PER round-trip
was less painful.
It wasn't a bad flight, but overall the whole
thing had a overall air of new unpolishedness
which I haven't seen from United out of SFO
in recent memory.
I'm doing the SJC->BOS route later this week and will have commentary on that when I get back.
Jetdillo
out of San Jose(SJC) over the holidays.
I flew out of SJC instead of SFO in response to their double miles promo they've been having as part of flogging the new route, so
I bit.
Breakfast was better than usual for Y-class.
I haven't done a breakfast flight in a while,(If I'm going to blow a whole day going east, I'd rather get some sleep and leave later) so it was good to see some choice other than the mondo greasefest of eggs and sausage they seem to have. Small blueberry pancakes were available so I had those. Denny's quality, but still most digestible than usual.
I was bulkhead in the A320, my favorite spot
when I can't get up front. If you have to go
Y, 6A is not a bad spot 'cause of the extra
smidgen of legroom that's available from the
1st-class seats right in front of you.
Attendance was okay, maybe a bit thin compared to what I'm used to, esp. since I
tend to fly on '67s or DC-10s when I'm going out of SFO. They're kind of small, but I'd
still take them any day of the week over a
757.
I have to agree with the general commentary on the video fare. "Air Bud" hit a new low
for me in terms of movie offerings. On an
8AM flight out of Silicon Valley, this is
NOT the place to be showing a "family" movie.
There was hardly anybody on board that wasn't
nattering on about their company's impending IPO or tapping away on their laptop. Even though I was going to visit family, I still
spent most of the trip catching up on work.
If UA wants people to watch(read pay), I'd
ask that they consider somewhat more adult
fare. It doesn't even have to be all that NEW, just as long as it's not from the Disney
live-feature factory which obviously hasn't
seen a change in creative direction since
"The Boatniks"! in the late '60s.
Even being subjected to repeated showings
of "Speed II" on an Ansett SYD-PER round-trip
was less painful.
It wasn't a bad flight, but overall the whole
thing had a overall air of new unpolishedness
which I haven't seen from United out of SFO
in recent memory.
I'm doing the SJC->BOS route later this week and will have commentary on that when I get back.
Jetdillo
Dec 1, 1998, 5:37 am
#2
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Santiago, Chile
Posts: 527
Be advised that the double miles promo on this route seems to apply only to roundtrip flights. I also went out of my way to fly out of SJC rather than SFO, only to find out later that it would not bring any extra miles. Oh well...
Dec 1, 1998, 5:47 am
#3
Original Member
Original Poster
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 59
Ooops...I forgot to mention that this was a
stairway boarding flight, not a jetway one.
I haven't actually had a need to fly into
or out of SJC for a number of years now,
but do recall using a jetway on previous
occasions there.
Hopefully they've got some sort of covering
in case of weather because by all appearances
this was not a unique occurrence as most of the United gates in Terminal C appeared to
be ground-level.
stairway boarding flight, not a jetway one.
I haven't actually had a need to fly into
or out of SJC for a number of years now,
but do recall using a jetway on previous
occasions there.
Hopefully they've got some sort of covering
in case of weather because by all appearances
this was not a unique occurrence as most of the United gates in Terminal C appeared to
be ground-level.
Dec 1, 1998, 6:32 am
#4
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 1,666
It was interesting to see that United was not using a jetway to board their transcontinental flight. Every time I board with American out of SJC, I have used a jet way.
--Jim
--Jim
Dec 1, 1998, 8:47 am
#5
Original Member, Moderator: Hotel Deals and MilesBuzz
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 14,259
I fly Alaska Airlines into SJC and have always walked down to stairs; never used a jetway at SJC.
Dec 1, 1998, 1:41 pm
#6
Original Member
Original Poster
Join Date: May 1998
Posts: 59
Jim_B:
I actually called the Premier Desk before I booked my tickets to check on this and they
said that yes, it was for paired direct flights. (The SJC->IAD pair is 230 and 231
and SJC->BOS is 234 and 233)
If it hadn't been, I would have taken one of
their SJC->DIA or SJC->ORD connectors that
left at a somewhat more civilized hour.
JIMBOLIGUY:
That surprises me a bit more too then, esp. given American's love affair with the MD-80, which is even lower to the ground that the Airbus I believe.
I'd be curious to hear other's experiences with this and will let you all know what happens this week with the BOS leg.
I actually called the Premier Desk before I booked my tickets to check on this and they
said that yes, it was for paired direct flights. (The SJC->IAD pair is 230 and 231
and SJC->BOS is 234 and 233)
If it hadn't been, I would have taken one of
their SJC->DIA or SJC->ORD connectors that
left at a somewhat more civilized hour.
JIMBOLIGUY:
That surprises me a bit more too then, esp. given American's love affair with the MD-80, which is even lower to the ground that the Airbus I believe.
I'd be curious to hear other's experiences with this and will let you all know what happens this week with the BOS leg.
Dec 1, 1998, 4:23 pm
#7
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Pasadena, CA. USA
Posts: 1,438
The last two times I flew to LA, I flew the BOS-SJC-LAX route. Yes, it was a lot of hassle and a waste of time, but for 15k miles per trip, it was worth it.
A couple of things good about this flight though. I think UA started this route because it wanted to compete with AA and not because there was a need for it. Why? For the last three legs (flying back to BOS tonight) there were virtually no one on the flight. Everyone was able to get his/her own 3-seat section. In addition, the A3xx is much more comfortable than the Boeings!
But why can't UA be like Canadian who also has the A3xx but has the legrests (flew BOS-Vancouver a couple of weeks ago)?
A couple of things good about this flight though. I think UA started this route because it wanted to compete with AA and not because there was a need for it. Why? For the last three legs (flying back to BOS tonight) there were virtually no one on the flight. Everyone was able to get his/her own 3-seat section. In addition, the A3xx is much more comfortable than the Boeings!
But why can't UA be like Canadian who also has the A3xx but has the legrests (flew BOS-Vancouver a couple of weeks ago)?
Dec 2, 1998, 11:51 am
#8
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 2,587
good point on the flights using the A3xx planes. UA uses them out of central Fla (MCO/TPA) into LAX/SFO. I was on a flight this summer where Titanic was shown. The flight attendant said that Titanic was the best movie (brought in most $$) of any movie she'd ever seen.