UA launches LAX-SIN

KarelXWB · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:08 pm

Longest non-stop service.

United Airlines (UAL) today announced that it will introduce daily nonstop flights between its Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) hub and Singapore's Changi Airport (SIN), effective Oct. 27, 2017 (westbound), subject to government approval. The flight between LAX and SIN will set the new distance record for any airline operating a flight to or from the United States, at 8,700 miles.

United's existing service between San Francisco International Airport (SFO) and SIN started one year ago, June 1, 2016 and holds the current record for the longest scheduled 787 flight operated by any airline and is currently the longest scheduled flight operated by any U.S. carrier, at 8,446 miles. The airline will operate both routes with Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircraft.

Press release
http://newsroom.united.com/2017-06-01-U ... -Singapore

Polot · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:11 pm

Once again stealing SQ's thunder.

LAXintl · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:11 pm

Yup, talk about one long flight.... blocked at 17:55 westbound

Effective October 27th with 787-9

UA37 LAX-SIN 2055-0650
UA38 SIN-LAX 1100-1015

With this additional nonstop service the existing HKG-SIN tag flight will be eliminated.

Obviously the SFO-SIN service launched in 2016 has done well to warrant this additional route. Heard LA basin was the largest feeder market on the SFO-SIN nonstop.

Wonder if this will push SQ to move up its own LAX nonstop using regular A350s?

IrishAyes · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:12 pm

wow. definitely a move as part of the "LAX-comeback" strategy that Parker wants to implement at UA.

once SQ returns, the bloodbath will continue. you can find ridiculously cheap fares on SFO-SIN nowadays.

AsiaTravel · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:14 pm

It begs the question of the viability of SQ's only premium A350s on this route...

ikolkyo · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:16 pm

Excited to see how the 789 performs on this route!

TWA772LR · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:17 pm

And we were all thinking BNE AKL or HKG. My eyes actually widened when I saw this.

LAXintl wrote:

With this additional nonstop service the existing HKG-SIN tag flight will be eliminated.

They must be trying to funnel EWR and ORD originating pax on this flight if they are axing the HKG-SIN service.

simpv · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:18 pm

Excellent; some impressive international additions at LAX recently. I can't imagine SQ is too pleased, but it certainly gives UA some extra points in the LA basin now.

Flighty · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:19 pm

In what way is this a "record?" For United Airlines personally?

TWA772LR · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:19 pm

Flighty wrote:
In what way is this a "record?" For United Airlines personally?

United's longest ever nonstop flight.

787fan8 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:21 pm

This will probably encourage SQ to step up the launch of their non stop SIN-LAX.

DolphinAir747 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:22 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
And we were all thinking BNE AKL or HKG. My eyes actually widened when I saw this.
LAXintl wrote:

With this additional nonstop service the existing HKG-SIN tag flight will be eliminated.

They must be trying to funnel EWR and ORD originating pax on this flight if they are axing the HKG-SIN service.

They will probably carry these pax via NRT (with NH operating the intra-Asia flight). It's much shorter.

KarelXWB · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:22 pm

787fan8 wrote:
This will encourage SQ to step up the launch of their non stop SIN-LAX.

I doubt Airbus can accelerate the introduction of the A350-900ULR.

Polot · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:24 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
787fan8 wrote:
This will encourage SQ to step up the launch of their non stop SIN-LAX.

I doubt Airbus can accelerate the introduction of the A350-900ULR.

If UA can use a 789 on the nonstop then SQ can easily use the base A359. They will just have to accept the blocked seats.

I imagine SQ is studying it now.

Flighty · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:25 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
Flighty wrote:
In what way is this a "record?" For United Airlines personally?

United's longest ever nonstop flight.

Yeah, but that's not what they said. PR screwed up. EWR-SIN was flown for years, at 9,500+ miles. This flight is much shorter.

KarelXWB wrote:
Longest non-stop service.

The flight between LAX and SIN will set the new distance record for any airline operating a flight to or from the United States, at 8,700 miles.

False. The qualifier of "current record" in the next paragraph does not redeem the lie. And what is a "current record," anyway, I have never heard of such a thing. I expect it to be reissued.

Irehdna · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:26 pm

Does anybody else see SQ start ORD-SIN and YYZ-SIN (in addition to JFK-SIN) instead of LAX-SIN with the A359ULR? Or will SQ go all out and start LAX as well?

Polot · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:27 pm

Irehdna wrote:
Does anybody else see SQ start ORD-SIN and YYZ-SIN (in addition to JFK-SIN) instead of LAX-SIN with the A359ULR? Or will SQ go all out and start LAX as well?

They will definitely operate LAX-SIN nonstop at some point. LAX is too important to SQ for them to ignore it and cede nonstop customers to UA.

KarelXWB · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:30 pm

Polot wrote:
If UA can use a 789 on the nonstop then SQ can easily use the base A359. They will just have to accept the blocked seats.

Fair enough.

Polot wrote:
Irehdna wrote:
Does anybody else see SQ start ORD-SIN and YYZ-SIN (in addition to JFK-SIN) instead of LAX-SIN with the A359ULR? Or will SQ go all out and start LAX as well?

They will definitely operate LAX-SIN nonstop at some point. LAX is too important to SQ for them to ignore it and cede nonstop customers to UA.

fun2fly · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:31 pm

No one predicted this one. Good move UA. The elimination of HKG>SIN is a no brainer. UA getting some mojo back.

LAXintl · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:33 pm

SQ has already announced the intention of resuming LAX and NYC nonstops. Its just matter of getting the planes.

airbazar · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:37 pm

This has to take a serious penalty in the Winter. As it is, SFO-SIN has some 2 or 3 rows blocked.
Demand for premium seats must be very high for them to be willing to take an even bigger penalty from LAX.

Polot wrote:
If UA can use a 789 on the nonstop then SQ can easily use the base A359. They will just have to accept the blocked seats.

Indeed. Every report says that SQ's A359's perform better (fewer blocked seats), from SFO than UA's 789's.

Polot wrote:
Once again stealing SQ's thunder.

The irony is that I don't think this route would be possible without the newly found "friendship" between the 2 airlines which now makes it easier for UA/SQ to get connections on both ends.

BG777300ER · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:37 pm

18 hours in United Economy. I LOL at this.

jfklganyc · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:39 pm

Yawn SQ. Yawn.

Several days late. Several dollars short

jbs2886 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:41 pm

This is unexpected, but good news for UA. Somewhat of an aside, could a 777-200LR do the route? I assume so.

Irehdna · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:44 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
This is unexpected, but good news for UA. Somewhat of an aside, could a 777-200LR do the route? I assume so.

SQ operated A345 on longer routes than this, and A345 and 77L have similar range. One would think DL would have a golden opportunity to start LAX-SIN on 77L at full capacity, but they haven't apparently.

AWACSooner · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:47 pm

IrishAyes wrote:
wow. definitely a move as part of the "LAX-comeback" strategy that Parker wants to implement at UA.

Did I miss the memo where Parker left AA?

United787 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:48 pm

Impressive UA, congrats! Although I am sad to see the HKG-SIN tag gone, I took that flight on 744 for my honeymoon.

KarelXWB · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:49 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
This is unexpected, but good news for UA. Somewhat of an aside, could a 777-200LR do the route? I assume so.

Yes the 777-200LR can perfectly fly that route, just not with the same economics as the 787-9.

ikolkyo · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:50 pm

AWACSooner wrote:
IrishAyes wrote:
wow. definitely a move as part of the "LAX-comeback" strategy that Parker wants to implement at UA.

Did I miss the memo where Parker left AA?

I think meant to say Scott Kirby.

bgm · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:50 pm

BG777300ER wrote:
18 hours in United Economy. I LOL at this.

Bloodcurdling is probably more appropriate. I shudder at the thought.

ojjunior · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:53 pm

LAXintl wrote:
Yup, talk about one long flight.... blocked at 17:55 westbound

Geez! Poor mortals those trapped that long in the most modern Boeing's tuna cam...
Will there be psychologists on board?
Oh 747 how do we miss you on ULH...

FriscoHeavy · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:53 pm

airbazar wrote:
This has to take a serious penalty in the Winter. As it is, SFO-SIN has some 2 or 3 rows blocked.
Demand for premium seats must be very high for them to be willing to take an even bigger penalty from LAX.
Polot wrote:
If UA can use a 789 on the nonstop then SQ can easily use the base A359. They will just have to accept the blocked seats.

Indeed. Every report says that SQ's A359's perform better (fewer blocked seats), from SFO than UA's 789's.
Polot wrote:
Once again stealing SQ's thunder.

The irony is that I don't think this route would be possible without the newly found "friendship" between the 2 airlines which now makes it easier for UA/SQ to get connections on both ends.

Someone on here ran the numbers when the SFO-SIN route launched. In fact, most days it goes out with no blocked seats and usually only some days in the winter. It certainly isn't guaranteed that the A359 will perform better. DL has determined it would take penalties severe enough on LAX-SYD that they 77L is still the better choice.

The 787 (both 8 and 9) are incredibly capable aircraft.

77H · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:54 pm

Flighty wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Flighty wrote:
In what way is this a "record?" For United Airlines personally?

United's longest ever nonstop flight.

Yeah, but that's not what they said. PR screwed up. EWR-SIN was flown for years, at 9,500+ miles. This flight is much shorter.

KarelXWB wrote:
Longest non-stop service.

The flight between LAX and SIN will set the new distance record for any airline operating a flight to or from the United States, at 8,700 miles.

False. The qualifier of "current record" in the next paragraph does not redeem the lie. And what is a "current record," anyway, I have never heard of such a thing. I expect it to be reissued.

So an airline announces a new route and you get hung up on something as trivial as a press release calling it a record flight distance? Does it really mean that much to you or do you just want to muddy UA's accomplishment where possible?

77H

ikramerica · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:56 pm

United787 wrote:
Impressive UA, congrats! Although I am sad to see the HKG-SIN tag gone, I took that flight on 744 for my honeymoon.

I took that flight when it was a PanAm 747-SP. So nya nya.

Polot · Thu Jun 01, 2017 2:58 pm

18 hours in any economy seat sucks. At that point how good the service/food/etc is on one airline versus another is irrelevant as most of the trip you are just sitting bored at your seat.

winginit · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:04 pm

Polot wrote:
18 hours in any economy seat sucks. At that point how good the service/food/etc is on one airline versus another is irrelevant as most of the trip you are just sitting bored at your seat.

18 hours in any seat sucks. Over the past several years I've frequented DFW-HKG/SYD/AUH/DOH across multiple carriers, and irrespective of whether I'm in Y, J, or F the boredom starts to take a serious mental toll around hour 15.

BENAir01 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:06 pm

Wow, that is unexpected. I could see SQ launching this with the 359 and moving it to ULR when they arrive. Or even not and using the extra frames for ORD, IAD, or second dailies to Cali.

LAXintl · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:10 pm

TWA772LR wrote:
They must be trying to funnel EWR and ORD originating pax on this flight if they are axing the HKG-SIN service.

Those customers have the double daily ANA JV flight via NRT option to connect to.

Irehdna wrote:
One would think DL would have a golden opportunity to start LAX-SIN on 77L at full capacity, but they haven't apparently.

Suppose they could, but I would think SEA-SIN be better and lower risk option. Also not sure DL has anywhere close to the market presence at SIN UA does. Like HKG they are the weaker player compared to UA.

Ultimately DL will have to do something with its NRT-SIN tag with drawdown and loss of feed at NRT.

airbazar wrote:
This has to take a serious penalty in the Winter. As it is, SFO-SIN has some 2 or 3 rows blocked.

They now have a year experience with the SFO-SIN flight, so have good data on what the restrictions would be.

airbazar wrote:
Demand for premium seats must be very high for them to be willing to take an even bigger penalty from LAX.

Per former VP comments couple years ago, SIN-NRT flight at the time had the networks highest percentage of premium bookings which nearly entirely flowed to US connections. This was the impetus to implement the SFO nonstop.

Obviously UA now has seen how its SFO bookings and revenue works and has determined there is sufficient demand for a LAX nonstop as well.

KarelXWB · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:10 pm

Polot wrote:
most of the trip you are just sitting bored at your seat.

Well you can always watch the extended versions of Lord of The Rings and Hobbit trilogies :thumbsup:

Polot · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:14 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Polot wrote:
most of the trip you are just sitting bored at your seat.

Well you can always watch the extended versions of Lord of The Rings and Hobbit trilogies

Watching the Hobbit trilogy would probably make those 18 hours even worse. :bouncy:

Irehdna · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:16 pm

Is it possible that UA start ORD-BOM or EWR/SFO-BLR with these B789? There should be adequate demand on these to make a flight on B789 economical. Additionally, 9W is using EU ST hubs and will not start USA nonstop in a while, and AI would never add a new LH route from BOM/BLR these days, as their hub is at DEL. This would make UA free from any possible competition.

Now LAX-SIN will likely have SQ start soon (probably with regular A359 now), but I agree this is higher yielding than India routes. Still something to consider though.

LAXdude1023 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:19 pm

Its great that UA went outside the box on this one, I like their way of thinking.

That said, Im happy I live in a city like Houston that has ample service on foreign carriers within the same alliance. Im going as far as NRT with UA, but I have no interest in an 18 hour flight with them. Ill stick to BR and NH for my Asia needs.

sw733 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:20 pm

winginit wrote:
Polot wrote:
18 hours in any economy seat sucks. At that point how good the service/food/etc is on one airline versus another is irrelevant as most of the trip you are just sitting bored at your seat.

18 hours in any seat sucks. Over the past several years I've frequented DFW-HKG/SYD/AUH/DOH across multiple carriers, and irrespective of whether I'm in Y, J, or F the boredom starts to take a serious mental toll around hour 15.

Absolutely. I do flights like DFW-SYD and ORD-HKG several times each year, and even in J it's just a looooong time. Don't get me wrong, I've done them both in Y and know how lucky I am to be in J, but still...it gets old.

xjetflyer2001 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:37 pm

Flighty wrote:
TWA772LR wrote:
Flighty wrote:
In what way is this a "record?" For United Airlines personally?

United's longest ever nonstop flight.

Yeah, but that's not what they said. PR screwed up. EWR-SIN was flown for years, at 9,500+ miles. This flight is much shorter.

I think he meant that this is United Airlines personal record for longest non stop, not the longest non stop ever flown, as United never flew EWR-SIN

BG777300ER · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:37 pm

I think this proves we never know what UA is thinking, including if they will take delivery of the A350 or not. Any rumors are pure speculation until its an official release from the airline.

col · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:40 pm

Cough, I guess copying is a form of compliment. Shall we expect the EWR direct next, or will SQ announce somewhere else LOL.

United787 · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:48 pm

ikramerica wrote:
United787 wrote:
Impressive UA, congrats! Although I am sad to see the HKG-SIN tag gone, I took that flight on 744 for my honeymoon.

I took that flight when it was a PanAm 747-SP. So nya nya.

The soul plane wins!

FlyUSAir · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:53 pm

18 hours in United Economy? Isn't that break some sort of human rights treaty?

Flighty · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:53 pm

77H wrote:
So an airline announces a new route and you get hung up on something as trivial as a press release calling it a record flight distance? Does it really mean that much to you or do you just want to muddy UA's accomplishment where possible?

77H

Not at all, I am glad UA is doing the route. Their main theme in the announcement was fake. I should just relax but hey. What the hell guys.

flyenthu · Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:54 pm

SQ needs to get in on ORD using SCOOT's 787s.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net