ncorman

Which is United nose number 2823 or number 357 off the line from Boeing and soon celebrating it's first delivery birthday... for those of you keeping score at home.

imkeww

READ THIS! Visit this handy, printable one-page reference chart on United's whole fleet that will let you identify whether your plane has E+/C+/laptop power/even the rows of E+, once you determine the series of aircraft that will fly your route, or once you find out the aircraft's nose or tail number on the day of departure.

You'll see that the only 777s missing laptop power all along are the 23 777 "27XX" series that do longer routes like SFO-LHR/CDG/FRA, and 1 sole 777 "28XX" series (N209UA) for some reason.

The transpac routes can only be flown by 28XX aircraft, which have proper crew rests, and the new interior decor. The 14 of the 15 777s that are used, but not limited to, the Pacific, such as LAX-AKL, have had working laptop power since they were delivered. The 777 you were on from LAX-AKL was not 'fixed' - it had working laptop power to begin with.

Please, take a look.

[This message has been edited by imkeww (edited 06-29-2002).]

Always Flyin

Empower may have come working at the time of aircraft delivery on the 28XX series, but when they retrofitted them with the First Suites, they deactivated the Empower, I believe due to a wiring issue. This was after the Swiss Air crash, if I recall properly where wiring associated with the entertainment system was a reported cause.

UA does use 27XX series aircraft to Asia because I have flown on them many times. They are easy to spot since they have 12 seats in F.

Not all flights to Asia require 4 pilots (e.g., Seattle--Tokyo) so UA does not have to use the pilot bunk equipped aircraft on those routes. Admittedly, most of my recent flights have been on 28XX flights.

Bottom line is that, at present, Empower is not working on the majority of the long-haul 777s on which I have flown to and within Asia. Every once in a while you get a surprise, but not too often, in my experience.

Note: your spreadsheet is nice. The pilot rest seats on the "A" market 777 aircraft is 3A, not 1A, and on the long-haul 777 aircraft not equipped with the pilot bunks (the 10 seat F configuration), it is 3A and 3J, not 1A-J.

Don't forget, the pilots also get 8A-B so they have a place to sit if they don't want to lay flat (so UA went from giving the pilots two F suites to flat bunks (which took two F suites out of the picture to make room) [b]and[/i] two business seats.

Should have stuck with giving them the two F suites...Heaven forbid they have to rest in a business class seat...

[This message has been edited by Always Flyin (edited 06-29-2002).]

imkeww

Thanks for clearing that up!

I will make the changes in the next update.

You are super knowledgable about the fleet! I know you're a 1K, but did you used to work for the airline in fleet planning or something? Or do you have really good connections?

The spreadsheet is part of my united enthusiast site. I would love it if you would contribute something, anything.

United Guide home of united enthusiasts

[This message has been edited by imkeww (edited 06-29-2002).]

Always Flyin

Answered privately by e-mail.

Mark Rogers

UA does not have to use the bunked aircraft on any of the Asia flights. The 27XX series with the 3A/J rest seats are acceptable for all Asia flying.

[b] Actually, the bunked aircraft appeared first; the two F suite configuration appeared later, although the most recent deliveries have been bunked aircraft. There was a plan (complete with conversion schedule) to convert all the 777s to an overhead rest facility, but that died around September 12th.

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Should have stuck with giving them the two F suites...Heaven forbid they have to rest in a business class seat...

It's an FAA requirement that a lie-flat rest facility be installed for flights over 12 hours, and as you know, the business class seats are not flat. The bunks are great for sleeping, but it's impossible to sit up in them. This makes rare tasks such as eating and reading very difficult. Since the first crew is often going on break for 6 hours around 2 p.m. local body time, it shouldn't be surprising that they might not want to stare up at the ceiling for hours. I've flown these flights many times, and both the seats and the bunk are very useful (I do sleep the entire time on the way back from Asia).

If you want to blame anyone, you can look to our former VP of flight ops. He hated pilots resting (he wouldn't even get up out of the seat to use the restroom on any Chicago to London flight), and refused to order the 777 with a proper rest facility. UA helped design the aircraft for *# sake - they certainly could have had the overhead rest facility designed to provide a rest compartment similar to the 744. But this particular individual insisted the 777 would never fly farther than Europe. A short 5 years later, the aircraft entered Pacific service, and now you see the 777 operating on 5 continents for UA. The rest mess was entirely avoidable.


(edited to fix quoting)


[This message has been edited by Mark Rogers (edited 06-29-2002).]

Always Flyin

Quite true. The FAA does require horizontal sleeping quarters for pilots for flights in excess of 12 hours in duration. Technically, it's only an advisory by the FAA, but the airlines correctly treat such "advisories" as binding. For really boring reading on the requirements of the horizontal sleeping compartment, see: http://www1.airweb.faa.gov/Regulator...E/AC121-31.pdf

United has two solutions to this requirement on its 777s: first, installation of wrap around, sound-deadening curtains on the first suites at 3A and J; the second is the installation of bunks behind the cockpit on the port side of the aircraft, which displaces the lav that was formerly at that position. The lav was moved to the center of the first row, displacing two first suites.

I had an accomodating pilot allow me to play around with the bunk area before a flight when I first encountered the layout. Frankly, I think it's poorly designed and uncomfortable. The layout in the 747-400 is much better, IMHO.

The pilots then also obtained the right to use two business class seats (8A and B) for the periods when they didn't want to sleep.

In the bunk layout, on flights over 12 hours, two first suites and two business class seats are lost.

But most flights are not over 12 hours on the 777s. In fact, very few are. Yet the two first suites are lost on all of the flights since they have been removed. Passengers, obviously, do not have use of the bunks on those flights so it is just revenue that United loses on flights less than 12 hours in length.

The better solution is the use of 3A and J. Two suites would still be lost to pilot rest seats, but the two business class seats would be returned for sale. The suites look more comfortable than the bunks anyway.

The other advantage is that the suites could also be released for sale on all the flights that are less than 12 hours in length.

The best solution is the overhead rest area, which has been designed for the new longer range 777-300ER, 777-200LR, and new 777-200ER aircraft. See: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/osu/ Due to financial concerns, retrofitting is unlikely in the near future. This option would allow all seats to be sold on all flights.

My earlier comment concerning the use of a business class seat for rest was aimed at the fact that United removes first suite 3A from sale for use as a pilot rest seat on flights longer than, I believe, eight hours. The FAA certainly does not require a horizontal sleeping surface under those circumstances, and other airlines find that a business class seat is acceptable for a pilot rest seat in those circumstances.