bedelman

A careful review (thanks to the Search function!) of past messages in this forum mentioning Australia yields decidedly mixed commentary about United's service on the LAX-SYD/MEL route. I don't want to belabor the point... but is there any consensus as to how United stacks up against the QF and NZ competition? Perhaps some change in light of recent renovations to make First Suites?


Thoughts on how hard it is to get an upper deck seat assignment? (Or maybe downstairs is actually OK on this route, since the fuel requirements apparently require them to leave some seats empty, among them surely the downstairs business class center seats?)

Thoughts on how hard it's likely to be to do a 26000-mile full fare coach-to-business upgrade (http://www.united.com/files/15099DOM.pdf p7) for LAX-MEL-LAX in mid-March? Some flexibility in dates, plus or minus perhaps two days in each direction.

transpac

People I work with seem to prefer NZ (can't speak for QF), UA is fine for me.

"Thoughts on how hard it is to get an upper deck seat assignment?" It's not hard at all.

"Thoughts on how hard it's likely to be to do a 26000-mile full fare coach-to-business upgrade" Again, this should not be challenging.

RichardMEL

I've always been able to upgrade on SYD-SFO (or v/v) and MEL-LAX v/v. Note the constant rumours that UA wants to ditch MEL-LAX and go back to serving MEL 1 stop via AKL again (nooooooo!). Then there's the "we'll downgrade 847 to a 777" rumour.. hmm. Anyway lower deck is usually far less full than upper deck so I have sat down there this year most of the time and managed to get a seat free next to me, which makes a wonderful trip - being able to fully recline *and* get out at one's leisure. yay!

Many people say NZ is the better choice for transpac, specially if in Y for the greater pitch.. hopefully Y+ on the 744 will redress that somewhat.

------------------
UA 1P MEL (awaiting 1K
posting!)

bagold

bedelman,

I've always got my upgrades as a PremEx and 1K on those segments. Normally, it shouldn't be a problem.

Getting seats upstairs isn't too hard as long as you don't try and get it at the gate.

If you take NZ and put your miles into UA, remember you don't get any bonus miles for being a Premier member.

In terms on how UA is compared to QF, I think it depends on the class of service for seats. For First, I find that QF is still better than UA's First Suite but not by much now. In terms of overall service, I find QF better than UA. Just had a wonderful flight on QF First a few weeks ago down to Sydney.

ozstamps

Just got off a LAX-MEL this afternoon, as the snow in JFK meant the incoming transcon just missed the LAX-SYD departure (and the scheduled beer with dhammer!)

I must say the C crew today were THE best I have ever had on a transpac, and I already penned a letter to UA about them, having got their names off the purser. Yes, usually staffers on that run are very senior and often pretty "cold" and robot like. These were younger staff on relief roster and were exceptional. (My incoming 767-300 flight that morning Brazil to JFK had the WORST C crew I've ever had, so it cuts both ways, and that went into the UA note as well.)

bedelman mid March is official low season to OZ, so planning and securing your upgrade now should be a cinch, and my tip is to go asking for row 15 NOW, as they go fast!

As my bags went to SYD, and as UA needed to reprotect me in J on Ansett MEL-SYD I spoke to several supervisors in MEL. The outgoing plane MEL-LAX was 100% sold today in all cabins they told me and had been mostly packed for past weeks. The head person there in MEL told me that planned cessation of MEL-LAX direct was now seriously being looked at based on recent revenue loads.

------------------
~ Glen ~

RichardMEL

ozstamps Thanks for that news mate. Always good to hear. Advance scheduling/planning at WHQ have been *very* quiet on the MEL-LAX issue, and I bet Anne Keating (SYDSZ) would be pushing real hard to keep it going after all the effort they went to to get it, plus they can't give QF clear victory.

My only comment though is, as you know, it's peak summer holiday time down here in oz so I am very unsurprised the planes are full.. either people going to the Colorado ski resorts, or just getting away from oz. I gather QF has been oversold for quite some time on the same route, and NZ prob. does fairly well via AKL (even though they code on UA). The real crunch may well be in the winter type months (eg: April-September) when loads may well be down again. UA could always consider making it seasonal, though I still like the 777 idea - if it has the range to do it without too many payload restrictions.

Anyway I have my fingers crossed that they won't axe it.

------------------
UA 1P MEL (awaiting 1K
posting!)

ozstamps

Richard - Hope for you it stays. Long way to USA via NZ! Did not bother me too much today as UA put us into C ex LAX, and onto a definite "J" AN seat (with J points) and gave us each a C/S Systemwide confirmable upgrade coupon for the "inconvenience", so worked rather nicely, as those cover 10,000 mile type flights like MEL-LAX-JFK etc I think, as all one flight #.

I think UA have actually announced a date (March 31?) the MEL-LAX route is supposedly to cease? Boss lady today there said they are making a killing on airfreight revenue, as QF is their only competitor on that, and UA clearly have the better network stateside on perishable or urgent stuff, so maybe that will save the day?

------------------
~ Glen ~

Ual Emp

Still no word or date has been announced. The only news pre Xmas was that if it does go back thru AKL it will remain a 744. The 777 idea has been canned. Can't really say much more at this point.

RichardMEL

Greetings UAL Emp and thanks for the comment. I didn't think the 777 idea would fly as even UA's 777-200ER's would likely have to deal with weight restrictions, and if, as ozstamps suggested, the cargo is making a killing, that would negate that issue (and we can understand why UA is doing well as QF is always restricted given the a/c they're flying vs. UA's Stage III pratts.).

If they do can 847/848 I'll just go via SYD rather than AKL. It was always difficult finding u/g space on 841/842 and easier ex-SYD given the SFO and LAX runs.

I wonder if UA wouldn't consider making the tag ex-SYD rather than AKL.

Also one has to wonder how any of this fits in given the constant rumours regarding AN's expansion to north america with the 744's from SQ......

------------------
UA 1P MEL (awaiting 1K
posting!)

dcpremex

Recently flew both ways (to Auk and back from Mel) in UA first suites and found them to be very good and the service was excellent also (and loved all the miles I got !)

ORD_UA1K

Actually, NZ operate daily on AKL-LAX on their own metal, in addition to the flight they code on UA. They also fly a milk run a few times a week that starts in AKL, stops in Rarotonga, Nadi, Apia, Nuku'alofa, Papeete, Honolulu (or some combination of the above) and eventually ends up in LAX. A few times a week, they also operate AKL-NAN-LAX. This is in addition to the daily AKL-SYD-LAX flight that requires no change of aircraft. Many exotic ways to get from AKL to the US!

[This message has been edited by ORD_UA1K (edited 01-08-2001).]

SST

You know, I can only echo what I've heard here: I have received THE BEST "C" service on United, both LAX-AKL-MEL and MEL-LAX which I've ever received, maybe from any airline. Thought it was about time I gave an 'attaboy' to the people who make this long journey rather pleasant. NZ has been fine; it's just that for some reason, UA's South Pacific folks do a great job, and much better than any of my other runs.

ORD_UA1K

I think one problem with this is that UA can actually carry pax AKL-MEL (i.e. revenue pax NOT flying in conjunction with a Transpac flight), whereas SYD-MEL would be cabotage, so no revenue for UA. Then again, ANZAC has the most liberal commercial aviation laws in the world, so I might have it wrong: can anyone clarify?

ORD_UA1K

But NZ fly SYD-LAX on their own metal daily... I can see how AN would fit in if they fly MEL-LAX, though it doesn't seem worthwhile for NZ to create brand awareness for two names from its own stable in the US market.

ozstamps

No idea if this is correct, but boy there is little evidence of it! Almost no It'l carriers (non ANZAC) do take rev. pax solely between internal points in Australia at least. In fact I can't think of one. If I fly Thai SYD-PER I don't believe I can buy only that segment - need to be a thru pax to BKK etc. Last week I flew UA from Rio to Sao Paulo in Brazil on UA metal - that for instance can be bought as a stand alone type fare my seat mate mentioned.

The EXCEPTION is an "open sky" free air type agreemnt between Australian and NZ carriers, (ANZAC) who I recall reading will soon have, or maybe even now have, rights to fly wherever they feel will make a buck - their choicxe, as long as slots are available. There are serious talks going on now about a common ANZAC currency, (and the legal rights of sheep in de-facto relationships.!)

And remember with the discussion above, that Air New Zeland owns Ansett these days, so rather counterproductive for AN metal to be flying to USA I guess? ORD 1K UA sums up the numerous Air NZ existing routes well above, and adding more seems a little pointless. Remember AN flies on its own metal only to Bali, Hong Kong and Japan outside OZ, plus a once a week type service to Fiji that arrives and leaves about 3am when I checked in December, so they really are not focused on being an International carrier.


------------------
~ Glen ~

[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited 01-08-2001).]