With the revised and updated UA order for A359's this week intended to be a major replacement for the 777-200ER fleet, what is the 787-10's role in the UA fleet as the first deliveries begin, I believe next year?

There are only 14 787-10 on order at UA. The role for the 787-10 at UA seems to be rather limited. Compare that with 45 frames of the A350-900.

mjoelnir wrote:

There are only 14 787-10 on order at UA. The role for the 787-10 at UA seems to be rather limited. Compare that with 45 frames of the A350-900.

It would not be surprising to see UA order more 787-10s in the future.

My thoughts are that 787-10s will replace some flying done by 767-300s and 777-200s. UA moved the 777-200A 3 class planes from IAD/ORD-Europe to domestic. THey backfilled he IAD flying with 767-400s, but now are moving the 767-400s back to EWR to help with crew scheduling. IAD has lost capacity and I think has the ability to fill 787-10s to Europe. UA can adjust demand quite well with revenue management on the Transatlantic network. 14 787-10s could cover either IAD, ORD or EWR flying.

mjoelnir wrote:

There are only 14 787-10 on order at UA. The role for the 787-10 at UA seems to be rather limited. Compare that with 45 frames of the A350-900.

Looking at the bigger picture, UA will be operating about 50 787s before the first A350s arrive. The 787-10 fleet may be small, but there is flexibility with the smaller 787s to move things around. Like you say I expect the role of the 787-10 to be limited. I would expect 787-10s to stay limited to one hub, but since the 787 family shares the same parts and crews, the 787-10s could get moved around. It has enough range to even fly some of the shorter transpacific routes like SFO-NRT if needed.

United started with 27 orders for the 787-10, but converted about half of them to the 77W. The converted the -10 orders because they were the last ones that were supposed to be delivered They already a couple of new orders for 2 787-9s since then, somehow they were not identified on Boeing's order book. I expect that United will keep on this practice and simply plays small orders when they think they need certain production slots. Using up all their options they still have on top of the firm orders. Just like they will probably order more 787-9s, they will have more then the 50 which are now in the fleet and on order.

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

As mentioned the 787-10 is well suited for routes previously served by UA's 77A's or 764s, I think their economics and passenger comfort features would make them perfectly suited for markets where UA has strong competition. I would say IAD and LAX make sense, from what I can gather online the following routes should all fall within range of the 787-10. With 14 frames they operate something similar to the following:

IAD: LAX x1, LHR x1-BRU x1- FRA x2- MUC x1- FCO x1, NRT x1
LAX: IAD x1, LHR x1, NRT x1, PVG x1

They could then close the 777 base at IAD, and reallocate those assets to boosting capacity at EWR.

Momo1435 wrote:

United started with 27 orders for the 787-10, but converted about half of them to the 77W. The converted the -10 orders because they were the last ones that were supposed to be delivered They already a couple of new orders for 2 787-9s since then, somehow they were not identified on Boeing's order book. I expect that United will keep on this practice and simply plays small orders when they think they need certain production slots. Using up all their options they still have on top of the firm orders. Just like they will probably order more 787-9s, they will have more then the 50 which are now in the fleet and on order.

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

I would rather assume they converted the 787-10 orders and kept the 787-9 orders because they wanted the 787-9. There are 4 787-9 left to be delivered. With the downsizing of the A350-1000 order to A350-900, I would not be astonished if the 787-10 would be downsized to 787-9.

So with the A350 on the way no one is anticipating a deferral of the 787-10, a conversion to the MOM, or the 787-10 being a clone of the 767-400?

Momo1435 wrote:

United started with 27 orders for the 787-10, but converted about half of them to the 77W. The converted the -10 orders because they were the last ones that were supposed to be delivered They already a couple of new orders for 2 787-9s since then, somehow they were not identified on Boeing's order book. I expect that United will keep on this practice and simply plays small orders when they think they need certain production slots. Using up all their options they still have on top of the firm orders. Just like they will probably order more 787-9s, they will have more then the 50 which are now in the fleet and on order.

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

I got the impression that the conversion to the 77W wasn't a vote against the 787-10, but a desire from UA to keep both capacity and capex under control - in addition to the fact that the -10 production slots were the ones furthest in the future. I'd agree that it wouldn't be surprising to see more 787 orders from UA, both for -9s and -10s.

I would imagine part of the challenge from UA's perspective is trying to figure out the timing of the MoM plane, how that might fit in to their fleet, and when it could arrive. That could impact any future 787 orders, particularly on the timing.

I think these could be the routes that see the 787-10.
1x daily ORD-FRA, IAD-FRA, EWR-FRA, EWR-LHR, IAD-LHR
Mid April through late October: ORD-MUC, IAD-MUC, ORD-BRU, EWR-BRU, IAD-BRU, IAH-LHR, IAH-AMS
November though early April: EWR-GRU, ORD-GRU, IAH-GRU, IAH-EZE, IAH-GIG, IAH-SCL???

I think these routes could use the extra capacity some as noted year around while other would be on a seasonal basis.

I don't think any 787-10's will be flying international routes out of LAX or SFO because the fleet is so small I think UA will confine them to EWR, IAD, ORD and IAH.

United has already confirmed that the 1st 787-10 are coming late next year, in fact, 1 of them is already built and even flying around as they will take the GE prototype.

The A350 order conversion was also a deferral of the 1st deliveries by 4 years. All the current 787-10s on order will probably be delivered before they will receive their 1st A350. Without the 787-10 they might have taken the A350s earlier, but that's impossible to say as they will both have a significantly different role in the United fleet.

Since United is so flexible with their orders it's also impossible to make solid statements what they will do in the next 5 years and beyond. With United changing their mind several times over the last 5 years it's not even strange that even they don't know right now how all the orders will be delivered. But the 787-10 will come to their fleet, that's at least 1 certainty.

mjoelnir wrote:

I would rather assume they converted the 787-10 orders and kept the 787-9 orders because they wanted the 787-9. There are 4 787-9 left to be delivered. With the downsizing of the A350-1000 order to A350-900, I would not be astonished if the 787-10 would be downsized to 787-9.

The first 787-10 is arriving next year and all 14 will be delivered before UA even receives their first A359. I would not expect the 787-10 orders to be downsized to 789s.

Part of the 787-10 conversions was to bring planes onto property quicker. They converted 787-10s with post-2020 delivery dates into 77Ws and 789s with deliveries beginning this year.

mjoelnir wrote:

There are only 14 787-10 on order at UA. The role for the 787-10 at UA seems to be rather limited. Compare that with 45 frames of the A350-900.

So 14 actual delivered aircraft will have a lesser role than 45 undelivered frames that keep getting pushed back to 5 years?

UA will continue to add 787s as their last gen planes age out, up until the MoM starts deliveries and/or until the A359neo is launched.

blockski wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

United started with 27 orders for the 787-10, but converted about half of them to the 77W. The converted the -10 orders because they were the last ones that were supposed to be delivered They already a couple of new orders for 2 787-9s since then, somehow they were not identified on Boeing's order book. I expect that United will keep on this practice and simply plays small orders when they think they need certain production slots. Using up all their options they still have on top of the firm orders. Just like they will probably order more 787-9s, they will have more then the 50 which are now in the fleet and on order.

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

I got the impression that the conversion to the 77W wasn't a vote against the 787-10, but a desire from UA to keep both capacity and capex under control - in addition to the fact that the -10 production slots were the ones furthest in the future. I'd agree that it wouldn't be surprising to see more 787 orders from UA, both for -9s and -10s.

I would imagine part of the challenge from UA's perspective is trying to figure out the timing of the MoM plane, how that might fit in to their fleet, and when it could arrive. That could impact any future 787 orders, particularly on the timing.

The conversion to the 77W was to get 744 replacements into the fleet ASAP. The 744 was having operational issues and maintenance costs were skyrocketing. It became obvious that the original idea of replacing the 744 with A359s didn't make sense. Some routes could be better served by 789s already in the fleet and other routes needed the increased capabilities and capacity of a 77W that the A359, though more efficient, wouldn't match.

That's the reality for UA, not every carrier.

I'd be thoroughly shocked if UA only ends up receiving 14 787-10s. My guess is they will end up operating close to 30 787-10s. I figure these aircraft will operate exclusively on high capacity routes 5,700 miles or less so think SFO-LHR/FRA/HND/NRT/ICN. Of course, this is assuming another 787 base is not created.

DeSpringbokke wrote:

I'd be thoroughly shocked if UA only ends up receiving 14 787-10s. My guess is they will end up operating close to 30 787-10s. I figure these aircraft will operate exclusively on high capacity routes 5,700 miles or less so think SFO-LHR/FRA/HND/NRT/ICN. Of course, this is assuming another 787 base is not created.

By the time 50 787s are in service, I don't think they'll be restricted to LAX/SFO/IAH like they are now. I think they'll definitely be at ORD/EWR/IAD. The 787-10 should do exactly what the 777-200As were doing out of IAD and ORD. That role is currently being filled by 767-300s and 767-400s, but I think the markets can fill 787s. We might see SFO-LHR-IAD-LHR-SFO and SFO-FRA-IAD-FRA-SFO turns. I think it will be interesting to see how UA allocated about 100 777s, 50 787s and 50 767s when they are all in the fleet in a few years before the A350s arrive.

ikramerica wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

There are only 14 787-10 on order at UA. The role for the 787-10 at UA seems to be rather limited. Compare that with 45 frames of the A350-900.

So 14 actual delivered aircraft will have a lesser role than 45 undelivered frames that keep getting pushed back to 5 years?

UA will continue to add 787s as their last gen planes age out, up until the MoM starts deliveries and/or until the A359neo is launched.

As it is there is not one delivered 787-10. Part of the 787-10 order was converted to 777-300. I do believek that UA will add more 787, but if the 45 A350-900 are supposed to replace most of the 777-200/200ER, than I think that the 787-9 is more useful to replace 767 than the 787-10. UA seems to downsize their ordered wide body frames (size not numbers).

i imagine 787-10's role for UA will be a slightly more capable(range & capacities) much economical 764.

jayunited wrote:

I think these could be the routes that see the 787-10.
1x daily ORD-FRA, IAD-FRA, EWR-FRA, EWR-LHR, IAD-LHR
Mid April through late October: ORD-MUC, IAD-MUC, ORD-BRU, EWR-BRU, IAD-BRU, IAH-LHR, IAH-AMS
November though early April: EWR-GRU, ORD-GRU, IAH-GRU, IAH-EZE, IAH-GIG, IAH-SCL???

I think these routes could use the extra capacity some as noted year around while other would be on a seasonal basis.

I don't think any 787-10's will be flying international routes out of LAX or SFO because the fleet is so small I think UA will confine them to EWR, IAD, ORD and IAH.

I fully agree. I don't see the 787-10 flying trans Pacific. Nor South America. Those will be the domain of the 359.

mjoelnir wrote:

ikramerica wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

There are only 14 787-10 on order at UA. The role for the 787-10 at UA seems to be rather limited. Compare that with 45 frames of the A350-900.

So 14 actual delivered aircraft will have a lesser role than 45 undelivered frames that keep getting pushed back to 5 years?

UA will continue to add 787s as their last gen planes age out, up until the MoM starts deliveries and/or until the A359neo is launched.

As it is there is not one delivered 787-10. Part of the 787-10 order was converted to 777-300. I do believek that UA will add more 787, but if the 45 A350-900 are supposed to replace most of the 777-200/200ER, than I think that the 787-9 is more useful to replace 767 than the 787-10. UA seems to downsize their ordered wide body frames (size not numbers).

As they are taking delivery of 787-10s, which they already confirmed, it doesn't make sense to reduce the order even further. They got 12 787-8s, I don't think they want an even smaller subtype. And their most recent 789 and 77W orders were no conversions of the 787-10 anymore, these were completely new orders. If they would have wanted to downsize the 787-10 order further they would have done it already going for even more conversions.

mjoelnir wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

United started with 27 orders for the 787-10, but converted about half of them to the 77W. The converted the -10 orders because they were the last ones that were supposed to be delivered They already a couple of new orders for 2 787-9s since then, somehow they were not identified on Boeing's order book. I expect that United will keep on this practice and simply plays small orders when they think they need certain production slots. Using up all their options they still have on top of the firm orders. Just like they will probably order more 787-9s, they will have more then the 50 which are now in the fleet and on order.

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

I would rather assume they converted the 787-10 orders and kept the 787-9 orders because they wanted the 787-9. There are 4 787-9 left to be delivered. With the downsizing of the A350-1000 order to A350-900, I would not be astonished if the 787-10 would be downsized to 787-9.

Why? They have a ton of IAD/EWR/ORD/IAH to Europe that will be great on the 10. When UA purchased the 737-10 they also noted that they've historically done well with simple stretch aircraft.

horsepowerchef wrote:

i imagine 787-10's role for UA will be a slightly more capable(range & capacities) much economical 764.

A 787-9 manages to do that. 787-9 and 767-400 are about the same size. The 787-10 is a 10% step up in capacity over the 767-400.

Momo1435 wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

ikramerica wrote:

So 14 actual delivered aircraft will have a lesser role than 45 undelivered frames that keep getting pushed back to 5 years?

UA will continue to add 787s as their last gen planes age out, up until the MoM starts deliveries and/or until the A359neo is launched.

As it is there is not one delivered 787-10. Part of the 787-10 order was converted to 777-300. I do believek that UA will add more 787, but if the 45 A350-900 are supposed to replace most of the 777-200/200ER, than I think that the 787-9 is more useful to replace 767 than the 787-10. UA seems to downsize their ordered wide body frames (size not numbers).

As they are taking delivery of 787-10s, which they already confirmed, it doesn't make sense to reduce the order even further. They got 12 787-8s, I don't think they want an even smaller subtype. And their most recent 789 and 77W orders were no conversions of the 787-10 anymore, these were completely new orders. If they would have wanted to downsize the 787-10 order further they would have done it already going for even more conversions.

And it is no problem to convert from 787-10 to 787-9.

mjoelnir wrote:

horsepowerchef wrote:

i imagine 787-10's role for UA will be a slightly more capable(range & capacities) much economical 764.

A 787-9 manages to do that. 787-9 and 767-400 are about the same size. The 787-10 is a 10% step up in capacity over the 767-400.

Perfect for accommodating all those Basic Economy folk!

mjoelnir wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

mjoelnir wrote:

As it is there is not one delivered 787-10. Part of the 787-10 order was converted to 777-300. I do believek that UA will add more 787, but if the 45 A350-900 are supposed to replace most of the 777-200/200ER, than I think that the 787-9 is more useful to replace 767 than the 787-10. UA seems to downsize their ordered wide body frames (size not numbers).

As they are taking delivery of 787-10s, which they already confirmed, it doesn't make sense to reduce the order even further. They got 12 787-8s, I don't think they want an even smaller subtype. And their most recent 789 and 77W orders were no conversions of the 787-10 anymore, these were completely new orders. If they would have wanted to downsize the 787-10 order further they would have done it already going for even more conversions.

And it is no problem to convert from 787-10 to 787-9.

You are missing the point. United is getting the 787-10, that's a fact. They can convert more -10s to the -9s, but then they end up with a very small unpractical sub fleet. And again, they could have converted more -10s to the -9s, but they didn't.

United is getting the 787-10 and they are going to make it work for them.

mjoelnir wrote:

horsepowerchef wrote:

i imagine 787-10's role for UA will be a slightly more capable(range & capacities) much economical 764.

A 787-9 manages to do that. 787-9 and 767-400 are about the same size. The 787-10 is a 10% step up in capacity over the 767-400.

UA has multiple daily flights on routes like ORD/EWR/IAD - LHR/FRA. There are also single daily flights on routes like CDG/AMS/BRU/MUC that may justify additional capacity over the 787-9. Historically UA has used 777s on these routes and even 747s to LHR and FRA. It's pretty easy to fill capacity by adjusting fares a little on many of those routes. The 787-10 may be doing the same routes as the 767-400 but UA could welcome the extra seats. UA is already using the 787-9 at IAD.

mjoelnir wrote:

horsepowerchef wrote:

i imagine 787-10's role for UA will be a slightly more capable(range & capacities) much economical 764.

A 787-9 manages to do that. 787-9 and 767-400 are about the same size. The 787-10 is a 10% step up in capacity over the 767-400.

I dont think an aircraft designed for ~7,600nm range is in the same class as a ~5,600nm aircraft...

Momo1435 wrote:

United has already confirmed that the 1st 787-10 are coming late next year, in fact, 1 of them is already built and even flying around as they will take the GE prototype.

The A350 order conversion was also a deferral of the 1st deliveries by 4 years. All the current 787-10s on order will probably be delivered before they will receive their 1st A350. Without the 787-10 they might have taken the A350s earlier, but that's impossible to say as they will both have a significantly different role in the United fleet.

Since United is so flexible with their orders it's also impossible to make solid statements what they will do in the next 5 years and beyond. With United changing their mind several times over the last 5 years it's not even strange that even they don't know right now how all the orders will be delivered. But the 787-10 will come to their fleet, that's at least 1 certainty.

If this is the case, where did I get the idea that they were getting RR engines on their 787-10s?

767333ER wrote:

If this is the case, where did I get the idea that they were getting RR engines on their 787-10s?

At one point Boeing's website said the UA 787-10 order had RR engines, fueling some speculation that UA was changing to RR for the -10 to get out of at least some of their A350 (RR TXWB) deal. But it was changed back to GE a short time later.

It escapes me for the moment, but did AA order any 787-10s or is UA the only US carrier to get them?

If one is to believe the numbers that Boeing has touted, the -10 will be more efficient than the A359 for shorter routes. So if you want the capacity of a 777, but don't need the range of a 359, the 78J could be a better fit.

That would be west coast or ORD to Europe (SFO-CDG/LHR, LAX-LHR, etc.). Could also be used for shorter TPAC flights where the capacity of the 77W is too much but more capacity than the 789 is required.

boilerla wrote:

If one is to believe the numbers that Boeing has touted, the -10 will be more efficient than the A359 for shorter routes. So if you want the capacity of a 777, but don't need the range of a 359, the 78J could be a better fit.

Isn't that usually the case for a same-generation aircraft with a shorter range?

Exactly. That's why the 787-10 will be a transatlantic beast. I don't think for a minute that UA won't take them. They will do that job very well.

727200 wrote:

It escapes me for the moment, but did AA order any 787-10s or is UA the only US carrier to get them?

No -10s. Yet

Question re: UA--no where in this thread is Denver mentioned. Are UA 787s leaving DEN?

The practical range of the 78J is not 7,600 miles (nm or sm). Look at the routes currently flown from ORD, IAD, EWR to Europe and that would be the domain of the 78J. South America could also work from the East Coast and UA would adjust the a/c depending on demand between the 767s, 788/789 and 78J.

Operational flexibility is the watchword these days. Look at how DL changes up their a/c to match demand and maximize revenue. Their operation has been so successful that other airlines have to look at their operation to adjust.

Perhaps there will be more 78Js and perhaps not. When you look at the wide body fleet mix and the a/c already on order, UA likely sees no need to adjust the 78J orders in the near term.

I think that the 787-10 is absolutely perfect for EWR. It's a major Trans-Atlantic hub to Europe with multiple flights a day to LHR. If UA had Polaris fitted 787-10's EWR/LHR on every flight, the quality gap between them and the competition on that route will be closed significantly enough that people wont feel they are missing out. Especially if you work for a company with a UA contract and go to the UK often, and other EU destinations.

It is a shame it's just 14 frames right now, but if folks here are right, and they order more 9's and 10's that will only make the flying experience so much better- and the clubs at EWR will have been finished by then too.

727200 wrote:

It escapes me for the moment, but did AA order any 787-10s or is UA the only US carrier to get them?

I'm not type sure if AA will end up with the 787-10. They definitely have the options for more.

I suppose it hinges on what AA plans on doing with the A350 order.

This may be a bit off the precise topic, but any clue what the 78-10 reg# range will be? The Nxx9xx sequence is a bit fragmented now. NxxxxU perhaps.

ikramerica wrote:

The conversion to the 77W was to get 744 replacements into the fleet ASAP. The 744 was having operational issues and maintenance costs were skyrocketing. It became obvious that the original idea of replacing the 744 with A359s didn't make sense. Some routes could be better served by 789s already in the fleet and other routes needed the increased capabilities and capacity of a 77W that the A359, though more efficient, wouldn't match.

That's the reality for UA, not every carrier.

Getting the 77W was an opportunistic way to go about replacing the 744s; but the method paying for those 77Ws likely involved controlling capacity and capital costs - hence the conversion of the later deliveries of the 787-10. United could've just ordered the 77Ws straight up; I'll bet plenty of Wall Street analysts would've flipped out.

Anyway, the broader point remains - I wouldn't read that 77W order conversion as a lack of confidence in the 787-10 by United.

727200 wrote:

It escapes me for the moment, but did AA order any 787-10s or is UA the only US carrier to get them?

United is only US carrier with firm 78J orders, but AA has 58 787 options, so chances are AA ends up with some,
especially when the time comes to replace their 77E's in the 2020's

BN727227Ultra wrote:

727200 wrote:

It escapes me for the moment, but did AA order any 787-10s or is UA the only US carrier to get them?

Question re: UA--no where in this thread is Denver mentioned. Are UA 787s leaving DEN?

No, the 787-8 is required for the NRT and future LHR flights. 763 cannot fly a TATL flight from DEN due to tire speed limits and the 777 would be too large.

caverunner17 wrote:

BN727227Ultra wrote:

727200 wrote:

It escapes me for the moment, but did AA order any 787-10s or is UA the only US carrier to get them?

Question re: UA--no where in this thread is Denver mentioned. Are UA 787s leaving DEN?

No, the 787-8 is required for the NRT and future LHR flights. 763 cannot fly a TATL flight from DEN due to tire speed limits and the 777 would be too large.

Thanks!

Momo1435 wrote:

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

What 767 routes need a big upgrade?

catiii wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

What 767 routes need a big upgrade?

Any 767 I'm on.

I assume he means upgauge.

But I don't think 763-78J is a logical step.

jetero wrote:

catiii wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

The 787-10 will be perfect for 767 routes that need a big upgrade.

What 767 routes need a big upgrade?

Any 767 I'm on.

I assume he means upgauge.

But I don't think 763-78J is a logical step.

Routes like ORD/IAD/EWR to LHR/FRA. UA has 2-5 flights a day on these routes. Historically UA would operate 3 daily 767-300ER flights ORD-LHR and the summer swap the middle flight to a 747-400. With the flights that have multiple frequencies, a 787-10 could replace a 763. For example UA doesn't need a 6:00pm and 6:30pm departure on EWR-LHR where the return flights leave at 11:40am and 12:20pm with a 757 and a 767. This could be consolidated and the slot used to open a new route like LHR-DEN or lease out the slot.

787-10s might also replace 777 flying freeing up 777s to replace 767s.. UA right now has 2 747-400s on SFO-FRA and a 747-400 and 777-200 on SFO-LHR. One of those routes could go to a 787-10, since it is expected to have more seats than the 777-200. The 777-200 flying SFO-LHR might bump off a 767-300 that is currently flying ORD-LHR and the cycle continues.

The US3 are tactical buyers. If Boeing has undelivered or deferred aircraft, except the 748, they offer first to the US3.

In respect to the 787, UA ordered very cheaply and with a high level of flexibility (no restrictions / penalties on model hopping and deferrals), which Boeing has attempted since, with partial success, to restrict at every opportunity.

Deliveries in the last five years have been a mix of new orders, switched orders, and one off Boeing offers.

Since late 2012 / early 2013, Boeing has been far stricter with it's contracts, with most new sales recorded on it's generic contract, with customer negotiated / Boeing approved variations, rather than the buyers contract, with Boeing negotiated variations.

The two most noticeable results - firmer pricing / smaller discounts, and if the customer wants flexibility, it's at a documented cost up front in the unit price, and a further fee when a switch or deferral is triggered.

Once all pre-2013 787 priced orders are worked through, plus one-off buys, will be interesting to see the US3's buying behaviour going forward. Don't be surprised if they increasingly run dual WB fleets of a given capacity and performance, ordering in tranches, and switching between OEM based on pricing and terms.

The 787-10 is a perfect aircraft for east coast transatlantic routes and gives UA the opportunity to use them as replacements on dense domestic routes. I'd expect we will see them order more frames in the coming years.

Newbiepilot wrote:

Routes like ORD/IAD/EWR to LHR/FRA. UA has 2-5 flights a day on these routes. Historically UA would operate 3 daily 767-300ER flights ORD-LHR and the summer swap the middle flight to a 747-400. With the flights that have multiple frequencies, a 787-10 could replace a 763. For example UA doesn't need a 6:00pm and 6:30pm departure on EWR-LHR where the return flights leave at 11:40am and 12:20pm with a 757 and a 767. This could be consolidated and the slot used to open a new route like LHR-DEN or lease out the slot.

Newbiepilot wrote:

787-10s might also replace 777 flying freeing up 777s to replace 767s.. UA right now has 2 747-400s on SFO-FRA and a 747-400 and 777-200 on SFO-LHR. One of those routes could go to a 787-10, since it is expected to have more seats than the 777-200. The 777-200 flying SFO-LHR might bump off a 767-300 that is currently flying ORD-LHR and the cycle continues.

Actually I wonder what the seat count of a UA 78J would be. UA's 789s are a bit premium heavy, with 48J seats compared to a 777's 50J seats. I wouldn't be surprised if UA kept the 78J at 48J as well, giving the 78J a more dense configuration that could be used as a big people mover for routes to Europe. Especially since Polaris seats will be heavier and all take up more space as it is.