Expecting delivery of 61 737-9 aircraft, starting with aircraft 7501 in April 2018.
The 737-9 will start revenue operations in June 2018.
ETOPS flying will begin in July from LAX-HNL.
Aircraft nose numbers for the 737-9 MAX will be 7501-7561.
The SCEPTRE fleet code for the 737-9 MAX is 42.

787 is narrower than 777, but the same 2-4-2 (1-2-1) polaris seating is planned... wonder that means narrower seat/aisle or a different angle between the seats.

Polaris seating is made for the aircraft. 763 has a narrower seat than the 777 and 3 inches shorter - would expect something similar on 78J. Angle may be adjusted as well.
76L has E+ on widows and Y in center section. A bit weird.
With 4 rows of 34 inch pitch E+ going to 3 PE rows, that should be 45 inch pitch for PE. That's 6-8 more pitch than domestic First and about 8 more inches than AA and DL.

Where are all these diagrammes and seating configs coming from? Are they from reputable sources or pure conjecture?

Judge1310 wrote:

Where are all these diagrammes and seating configs coming from? Are they from reputable sources or pure conjecture?

FA Manuals

Danke schoen!

Wow, never thought that Polaris would ever become a p.s. seat. But, perhaps it could? Would it be the best of the transcontinental F Class seats in the market? I have never flown Delta transcontinental, nor Mint and AA not for many years.
Given there are probably so many people connecting to SFO and LAX long haul flights from EWR that would provide a seamless ride, in the same top of UA’s product line...except for getting out of an amazing all aisle, private Polaris seat and into a 787 with old CO seats to Singapore and Australia, etc. for quite a number of years. Naturally when the 772s have Polaris, I’d take a nonstop from Newark to the nonstop destinations- but I go through SFO often also and happy to then get into a 77W. (I still miss the 747 though in the nose)
I have a strange relationship with the CO seat. When actually I’m in it, I like it fine enough (except for the climb over to pee) and when I’m sitting here at home thinking about that seat- I hate it. It feels SO yesterday!
I do LOVE getting a 752 domestically to Denver or Las Vegas or to IAH on the way to GIG. I will pay up for it vs a 737.

I’m actually a bit flabbergasted. These diagrams speak to one darn huge decision on the parts of many very senior people; is the mission to become the most preferred “Premium” US carrier by volume at least - even if Polaris is edged out a bit by DeltaOne?
Clearly the number of premium seats and large Polaris Lounges can’t do that alone. Service and other soft products need to meet the level of the ac themselves. Or, perhaps the “wave” will get them there

N652UA B763 VQQ-IAD returning to VQQ. Was on the ground at VQQ since Feb 26

United1 wrote:

That's actually two different seats...

The first two, with AVOD, are the B/E Aspire seats that are on the retrofitted 77Es and will be on the 787-10s.

The second two, with the tablet holder, are the B/E Meridian seats that are being fitted to the 737MAX (same as Garuda.)

Rockwell Collins Meridian seats, they acquired B/E Aerospace......

CapitalAvGeek wrote:

N652UA B763 VQQ-IAD returning to VQQ. Was on the ground at VQQ since Feb 26

Now enroute to IAD

Are they still going forward with the NGS mods on the ps757?

UA444 wrote:

Are they still going forward with the NGS mods on the ps757?

Yes.

764:
N66051 exited HKG 2825/15Apr with Y crew rest mod complete
N59053 exited MCO 2793/13Apr
​​​​​​​N76055 entered MCO 2794/13Apr

codc10 wrote:

The 76L configuration is one of the crazier layouts I've seen... seems that one pair of OW exits is deactivated, and I suppose UA expects to get a full business class service for 46 pax out of the forward galley? No wonder the Polaris service changes came about...

Agree a 767-300ER with 167 seats seems crazy premium heavy with 46 in J. Reminds me of some of the ANA/BA aircraft that are super premium heavy. What this is telling me for UA is that restricting capacity in Y to a very low number of seats will boost yields in Y. It also tells me that there is heavy demand for J seats on these routes that will pay a significantly higher price for J seats. The third observation is that these planes must be going out full with valuable cargo in the belly. In some cases it must be more profitable to carry air freight than low yielding Y class passengers.

IIRC the UA 767-200ER only had 176 seats and this is a 767-300ER with 9 less seats.

Other aircraft on other carriers with very low pax counts.
ANA 777-200ER 70 J, 36 W, 117Y= 223 Pax
ANA 77W: 8 F 68 J, 24 W, 112Y = 212 Pax
ANA 787-8: 46 J, 21W, 112Y= 179 Pax
BA: 777-200: 14 F, 48J, 40W, 122 Y= 224 Pax

gsg013 wrote:

codc10 wrote:

The 76L configuration is one of the crazier layouts I've seen... seems that one pair of OW exits is deactivated, and I suppose UA expects to get a full business class service for 46 pax out of the forward galley? No wonder the Polaris service changes came about...

Agree a 767-300ER with 167 seats seems crazy premium heavy with 46 in J. Reminds me of some of the ANA/BA aircraft that are super premium heavy. What this is telling me for UA is that restricting capacity in Y to a very low number of seats will boost yields in Y. It also tells me that there is heavy demand for J seats on these routes that will pay a significantly higher price for J seats. The third observation is that these planes must be going out full with valuable cargo in the belly. In some cases it must be more profitable to carry air freight than low yielding Y class passengers.

IIRC the UA 767-200ER only had 176 seats and this is a 767-300ER with 9 less seats.

Other aircraft on other carriers with very low pax counts.
ANA 777-200ER 70 J, 36 W, 117Y= 223 Pax
ANA 77W: 8 F 68 J, 24 W, 112Y = 212 Pax
ANA 787-8: 46 J, 21W, 112Y= 179 Pax
BA: 777-200: 14 F, 48J, 40W, 122 Y= 224 Pax

I just saw a seat map for this configuration. The side columns of 2 seats in economy are going to be economy plus (regular economy will be the section of 3 in the middle). Furthermore, there are four seats at the very back (crew rest) that are marked as premium plus. There are an additional 3 rows of premium plus midway over the wing in a 2-2-2 configuration, and of course Polaris for the entire front half in a 1-1-1 configuration.

That 76L configuration is insane. Never thought I would see another config on the same vein as AA's A321Ts.

Looks like the long-term P.S. plane. EWR-LAX/SFO probably has the demand needed. Will be a highly competitive product.

MSPNWA wrote:

That 76L configuration is insane. Never thought I would see another config on the same vein as AA's A321Ts.

Looks like the long-term P.S. plane. EWR-LAX/SFO probably has the demand needed. Will be a highly competitive product.

The 76L is not going to be dedicated to the transcons; it will be primarily international. If it shows up on TCONs, all the better, but the market does not call for such a low-volume, premium-dense configuration anymore. Premium cabin yields aren't what they used to be.

MSPNWA wrote:

That 76L configuration is insane. Never thought I would see another config on the same vein as AA's A321Ts.

Looks like the long-term P.S. plane. EWR-LAX/SFO probably has the demand needed. Will be a highly competitive product.

It has a crew rest so would assume this plane will still be used on overseas routes....as it's a 76L I wonder if that means London?

763:
N643UA sked to exit HKG mod 2805/17Apr with Polaris/winglets.

codc10 wrote:

The 76L is not going to be dedicated to the transcons; it will be primarily international. If it shows up on TCONs, all the better, but the market does not call for such a low-volume, premium-dense configuration anymore. Premium cabin yields aren't what they used to be.

What you're saying is completely opposite of what's out there today. If what you're saying is the case, why do we see all three of the big 3 place special configurations and premium-heavy airplanes on the transcon market and not use those same configurations for even LHR. You can see this configuration is built for the transcons and possibly specific LHR flights. It's way too premium to be a general international airplane.

MSPNWA wrote:

What you're saying is completely opposite of what's out there today. If what you're saying is the case, why do we see all three of the big 3 place special configurations and premium-heavy airplanes on the transcon market and not use those same configurations for even LHR. You can see this configuration is built for the transcons and possibly specific LHR flights. It's way too premium to be a general international airplane.

It will not be a general international aircraft, most 763s will keep the standard configuration of 30J/184Y, and the 76L will not be a transcon aircraft either. The 76Ls will be used to destinations like LHR, GVA, and ZRH, from the rumors I'm hearing (and this is still a few years from fruition) is 3 of the 5 EWR-LHR flights will utilize the 76L year around. However during the busy summer season the 78J will be utilized on the remaining 2 flights do to heavy demand, but during the winter months when leisure demand drops the remaining 2 flights will utilize 764s or standard 763s. Another route being targeted for these premium heavy 76Ls is ORD-LHR. The rumor is UA will utilize the 76L on 2 of the 3 daily flights year around however the rumor is the 78J will replace one of the 763s from mid April through the end of October, from November - mid April the 78J would revert back to a regular standard 763. I've heard would replace the 757 on the morning flights out of IAD with the 76L but the 2 evening flights would remain the same as they are today. Then there are also premium heavy routes like GVA and ZRH these routes from both IAD and EWR would utilize this aircraft year around.
What I still do not know is how many 763 will be converted into the 76L configuration. But I am hearing UA is going to deploy this configuration on some of the 763s that have the sCO diamond PE seating and those are some of the youngest 763s in our fleet meaning these premium heavy 76L once they start rolling out should be in the fleet for a while.

jayunited wrote:

MSPNWA wrote:

What you're saying is completely opposite of what's out there today. If what you're saying is the case, why do we see all three of the big 3 place special configurations and premium-heavy airplanes on the transcon market and not use those same configurations for even LHR. You can see this configuration is built for the transcons and possibly specific LHR flights. It's way too premium to be a general international airplane.

It will not be a general international aircraft, most 763s will keep the standard configuration of 30J/184Y, and the 76L will not be a transcon aircraft either. The 76Ls will be used to destinations like LHR, GVA, and ZRH, from the rumors I'm hearing (and this is still a few years from fruition) is 3 of the 5 EWR-LHR flights will utilize the 76L year around. However during the busy summer season the 78J will be utilized on the remaining 2 flights do to heavy demand, but during the winter months when leisure demand drops the remaining 2 flights will utilize 764s or standard 763s. Another route being targeted for these premium heavy 76Ls is ORD-LHR. The rumor is UA will utilize the 76L on 2 of the 3 daily flights year around however the rumor is the 78J will replace one of the 763s from mid April through the end of October, from November - mid April the 78J would revert back to a regular standard 763. I've heard would replace the 757 on the morning flights out of IAD with the 76L but the 2 evening flights would remain the same as they are today. Then there are also premium heavy routes like GVA and ZRH these routes from both IAD and EWR would utilize this aircraft year around.
What I still do not know is how many 763 will be converted into the 76L configuration. But I am hearing UA is going to deploy this configuration on some of the 763s that have the sCO diamond PE seating and those are some of the youngest 763s in our fleet meaning these premium heavy 76L once they start rolling out should be in the fleet for a while.

Safe to assume the 3 HA 763's will be the first 76L's? The LHR deal seems probable for the a/c usage. It will be a sweet ride. I'm not sure on the IAD AM flight...to go from 16 BF's to this a/c is a very large jump. I've only flown the route twice, but I had the whole row in coach and BF was not full either...one time 16 pax total on the plane and ice cream sundaes for us all!

MSPNWA wrote:

codc10 wrote:

The 76L is not going to be dedicated to the transcons; it will be primarily international. If it shows up on TCONs, all the better, but the market does not call for such a low-volume, premium-dense configuration anymore. Premium cabin yields aren't what they used to be.

What you're saying is completely opposite of what's out there today. If what you're saying is the case, why do we see all three of the big 3 place special configurations and premium-heavy airplanes on the transcon market and not use those same configurations for even LHR. You can see this configuration is built for the transcons and possibly specific LHR flights. It's way too premium to be a general international airplane.

If it were still 2012 I think I would agree with you. The UA 28J 757 and AA 321T configurations predate Mint, which dramatically changed the premium transcon market. Delta had plans to develop a special high-J 757 configuration for JFKLAX in particular, but scrapped it in favor of 767/330 service to match the higher J capacity with more Y, since the J no longer drives the same yields as before. It’s still better than other domestic markets, but once upon a time, Y was little more than an afterthought on the transcons; AA/UA made so much money up front that Y was just icing on the cake. No more.

It’s not a “general” international airplane, but at the same time, it is not “built” for the transcons.

If you look at the routings jayunited states from rumors, it would take about 12 units. So, UA could convert the newest 14 763s in 2 class plus the HA units for a total of 17, which should provide 2-3 spares and accommodate the am eastbounds which take an extra unit each.

Conversion of HA units would probably depend on seat availability and when the heavy premium mod program would begin. This could start in Fall 2018 after the remaining 3 class units have Polaris. Please don't slow the 772 program to initiate this configuration.

A total of 14-17 units would allow 7-10 units to remain with sCO seats and be utilized on transcons. That would leave UA with 3 763 configurations, which puts limitations on swap out capability.

Of course, the 764s could make a good transcon aircraft or get Polaris for international service.

jayunited wrote:

It will not be a general international aircraft, most 763s will keep the standard configuration of 30J/184Y, and the 76L will not be a transcon aircraft either. The 76Ls will be used to destinations like LHR, GVA, and ZRH, from the rumors I'm hearing (and this is still a few years from fruition) is 3 of the 5 EWR-LHR flights will utilize the 76L year around. However during the busy summer season the 78J will be utilized on the remaining 2 flights do to heavy demand, but during the winter months when leisure demand drops the remaining 2 flights will utilize 764s or standard 763s. Another route being targeted for these premium heavy 76Ls is ORD-LHR. The rumor is UA will utilize the 76L on 2 of the 3 daily flights year around however the rumor is the 78J will replace one of the 763s from mid April through the end of October, from November - mid April the 78J would revert back to a regular standard 763. I've heard would replace the 757 on the morning flights out of IAD with the 76L but the 2 evening flights would remain the same as they are today. Then there are also premium heavy routes like GVA and ZRH these routes from both IAD and EWR would utilize this aircraft year around.
What I still do not know is how many 763 will be converted into the 76L configuration. But I am hearing UA is going to deploy this configuration on some of the 763s that have the sCO diamond PE seating and those are some of the youngest 763s in our fleet meaning these premium heavy 76L once they start rolling out should be in the fleet for a while.

These rumors would be much more credible if they made economic sense. Currently GVA/ZRH is 3 763s and 1 764. Routes with the premium demand of an aircraft as premium-heavy as this 76L don't have the lowest ratio of J seats and the smallest J cabins in the fleet. No, they would have a premium-heavy, high J-count aircraft flying it already today. Even worse is the morning IAD-LHR. It's a 752, by far the lowest J ratio and J seat count of any UA internationally configured plane. If that flight actually has the demand of the most premium-heavy configuration among U.S. widebodies, then UA has been criminally underserving that route and has no clue about matching supply and demand. And if that's the case, then any rumor associated with their supply and demand decisions have to be called into serious question.

MSPNWA wrote:

jayunited wrote:

It will not be a general international aircraft, most 763s will keep the standard configuration of 30J/184Y, and the 76L will not be a transcon aircraft either. The 76Ls will be used to destinations like LHR, GVA, and ZRH, from the rumors I'm hearing (and this is still a few years from fruition) is 3 of the 5 EWR-LHR flights will utilize the 76L year around. However during the busy summer season the 78J will be utilized on the remaining 2 flights do to heavy demand, but during the winter months when leisure demand drops the remaining 2 flights will utilize 764s or standard 763s. Another route being targeted for these premium heavy 76Ls is ORD-LHR. The rumor is UA will utilize the 76L on 2 of the 3 daily flights year around however the rumor is the 78J will replace one of the 763s from mid April through the end of October, from November - mid April the 78J would revert back to a regular standard 763. I've heard would replace the 757 on the morning flights out of IAD with the 76L but the 2 evening flights would remain the same as they are today. Then there are also premium heavy routes like GVA and ZRH these routes from both IAD and EWR would utilize this aircraft year around.
What I still do not know is how many 763 will be converted into the 76L configuration. But I am hearing UA is going to deploy this configuration on some of the 763s that have the sCO diamond PE seating and those are some of the youngest 763s in our fleet meaning these premium heavy 76L once they start rolling out should be in the fleet for a while.

These rumors would be much more credible if they made economic sense. Currently GVA/ZRH is 3 763s and 1 764. Routes with the premium demand of an aircraft as premium-heavy as this 76L don't have the lowest ratio of J seats and the smallest J cabins in the fleet. No, they would have a premium-heavy, high J-count aircraft flying it already today. Even worse is the morning IAD-LHR. It's a 752, by far the lowest J ratio and J seat count of any UA internationally configured plane. If that flight actually has the demand of the most premium-heavy configuration among U.S. widebodies, then UA has been criminally underserving that route and has no clue about matching supply and demand. And if that's the case, then any rumor associated with their supply and demand decisions have to be called into serious question.

You're assuming they just swap out a plane that is already serving that purpose when they don't have a plane like this at the moment. By that premise, UA should be flying 777's on a route currently with demand for less than 100 Y pax. Whatever routes these planes fly, UA will have to shift pricing to fit the plane, right pricing J and potentially increasing prices in Y. No matter where they fly this plane, it is not going to look the same after the swap than the route does currently. Plus, other factors can include what markets get 763's because 772's are required elsewhere for range/cargo, etc.

cosyr wrote:

You're assuming they just swap out a plane that is already serving that purpose when they don't have a plane like this at the moment. By that premise, UA should be flying 777's on a route currently with demand for less than 100 Y pax. Whatever routes these planes fly, UA will have to shift pricing to fit the plane, right pricing J and potentially increasing prices in Y. No matter where they fly this plane, it is not going to look the same after the swap than the route does currently. Plus, other factors can include what markets get 763's because 772's are required elsewhere for range/cargo, etc.

Not assuming things at all. That's economic reality. Those routes have been 767s for longer than I can recall. So however long that has been, it leaves two realistic options. Either that's the best supply UA has for the demand, or UA has been incompetent at route planning by not making a significant change over all this time with the varied aircraft at their disposal. I'd lump your Y seat demand driver into the latter. It would be crazy to retrofit an airplane into a premium configuration in order to cater to an unusually small Y demand! That makes no sense. What we actually see is airlines deal with the Y seat demand second. One case in point is UA's 772 retrofit to 10-across Y. There was essentially no increase in J seats, only to the Y cabin, and they will undoubtedly be generally flying the same routes they are today. Do you really think every current 772 route needs ~20 more Y seats? Wouldn't take that bet. What is a strong bet is that UA will price those extra Y seats accordingly in order to match the static demand to the increased supply. Airlines make their big decision on the size of the premium cabin, and then they adjust their Y seats to fit that decision.

Tell me if I am crazy but would the 76L have the legs for EWR-TLV? I know there is a lot of lift needed with cargo but where the real high yielding pax on this route are up in J. If they put a 76L they could restrict capacity in Y increasing those yields and fill the 46 Polaris seats in J with high yield business pax?

gsg013 wrote:

Tell me if I am crazy but would the 76L have the legs for EWR-TLV? I know there is a lot of lift needed with cargo but where the real high yielding pax on this route are up in J. If they put a 76L they could restrict capacity in Y increasing those yields and fill the 46 Polaris seats in J with high yield business pax?

That would reduce the overall availability of J seats.

I think the 76L is a very interesting concept. Take the top fliers and their $$, have 100 seats for our loyal coach fliers, leave off 100 low margin seats for Norweigan and have a few more kg's of revenue cargo. Could this be the way of the future for the big 3? Different approach certainly vs. DL with smaller front cabins and larger Y's. Get some popcorn, it's an interesting experiment to watch play out.

MSPNWA wrote:

cosyr wrote:

You're assuming they just swap out a plane that is already serving that purpose when they don't have a plane like this at the moment. By that premise, UA should be flying 777's on a route currently with demand for less than 100 Y pax. Whatever routes these planes fly, UA will have to shift pricing to fit the plane, right pricing J and potentially increasing prices in Y. No matter where they fly this plane, it is not going to look the same after the swap than the route does currently. Plus, other factors can include what markets get 763's because 772's are required elsewhere for range/cargo, etc.

Not assuming things at all. That's economic reality. Those routes have been 767s for longer than I can recall. So however long that has been, it leaves two realistic options. Either that's the best supply UA has for the demand, or UA has been incompetent at route planning by not making a significant change over all this time with the varied aircraft at their disposal. I'd lump your Y seat demand driver into the latter. It would be crazy to retrofit an airplane into a premium configuration in order to cater to an unusually small Y demand! That makes no sense. What we actually see is airlines deal with the Y seat demand second. One case in point is UA's 772 retrofit to 10-across Y. There was essentially no increase in J seats, only to the Y cabin, and they will undoubtedly be generally flying the same routes they are today. Do you really think every current 772 route needs ~20 more Y seats? Wouldn't take that bet. What is a strong bet is that UA will price those extra Y seats accordingly in order to match the static demand to the increased supply. Airlines make their big decision on the size of the premium cabin, and then they adjust their Y seats to fit that decision.

Which is why I think that these would be destined for LHR, where J demand is still high, and even though Y demand is high, the margins are probably being destroyed by the likes of Norweigian. Maybe they're thinking, lose it. They have enough Y seats to satisfy frequent flyers on the routes, and not cater prices to the less than once a year bargain hunting tourists.

fun2fly wrote:

I think the 76L is a very interesting concept. Take the top fliers and their $$, have 100 seats for our loyal coach fliers, leave off 100 low margin seats for Norweigan and have a few more kg's of revenue cargo. Could this be the way of the future for the big 3? Different approach certainly vs. DL with smaller front cabins and larger Y's. Get some popcorn, it's an interesting experiment to watch play out.

Ha ha, you and I said exactly the same thing a minute apart.

cosyr wrote:

fun2fly wrote:

I think the 76L is a very interesting concept. Take the top fliers and their $$, have 100 seats for our loyal coach fliers, leave off 100 low margin seats for Norweigan and have a few more kg's of revenue cargo. Could this be the way of the future for the big 3? Different approach certainly vs. DL with smaller front cabins and larger Y's. Get some popcorn, it's an interesting experiment to watch play out.

Ha ha, you and I said exactly the same thing a minute apart.

Nice. Let's take the rest of the day off.

I like the strategy, rather than offer economy minus seats TATL, just offer the standard economy and leave the rest to WOW and friends.

MSPNWA wrote:

These rumors would be much more credible if they made economic sense. Currently GVA/ZRH is 3 763s and 1 764. Routes with the premium demand of an aircraft as premium-heavy as this 76L don't have the lowest ratio of J seats and the smallest J cabins in the fleet. No, they would have a premium-heavy, high J-count aircraft flying it already today. Even worse is the morning IAD-LHR. It's a 752, by far the lowest J ratio and J seat count of any UA internationally configured plane. If that flight actually has the demand of the most premium-heavy configuration among U.S. widebodies, then UA has been criminally underserving that route and has no clue about matching supply and demand. And if that's the case, then any rumor associated with their supply and demand decisions have to be called into serious question.

You are just looking at these routes singularly while revenue management and international route planners have to look at the entire network as a whole. While you are correct UA is utilizing 763/4s on these routes currently with 30J - 39J seats it doesn't necessarily mean UA has been under serving the route purposely. It could be that although a case could be made for deploying a 789 or a 772ER on these routes UA saw opportunity that could generate more revenue deploying those premium heavy aircraft on routes that were better optimized for those aircraft. UA has made it no secret that the 767 in their opinion is one of the best aircraft for many TATL routes out of EWR, IAD and ORD, the only reason UA is using 788 out of IAD on TATL routes is it increases aircraft utilization. The increase utilization on those TATL routes has basically given UA access to an additional 788 per day that we didn't have when the aircraft were being rotated out of IAH. Another example that I can think of is EWR-LHR before and just after the merger CO was utilizing four 757s and one 77E, if you take away the one crew rest seat required on the 757s sCO had a total of 110 premium seats available daily on this route. Fast forward to today the route utilizes a mixture of 763/764s for a total of 165 premium seats daily. EWR-LHR has been a high premium route for years but CO utilized 757s with the smallest premium cabin not because the demand wasn't there but because aircraft with larger premium cabins were needed on other routes. However once the right size aircraft were available UA deployed them on EWR-LHR route. The same could be true for GVA/ZRH, I don't know I don't work in revenue management or international route planning but I do know the rumor I heard. Whether or not these premium heavy 76Ls end up on these routes is anyone's guess because like I stated in my original post this is rumor but what ins't rumor is the premium heavy 76Ls, what also isn't rumor is these aircraft will not be utilized on a daily basis on transcon routes. Everything else is speculation and rumor but I strongly to believe the LHR rumor and I'm inclined to believe the GVA/ZRH rumor.

Working here at Willis Tower I've learned to take rumors with a grain of salt, some have turn out to be true while others were just rumors only time will tell if these rumors I've heard are true or just plain rumors.

Out on the runway. IMO, the gold swoosh could hug the grey belly a bit more.

nikeson13 wrote:

Out on the runway. IMO, the gold swoosh could hug the grey belly a bit more.

Yes, and the angles between the gray belly and the gold swoosh don't match at the nose.
It's kind of an awkward implementation of an otherwise attractive design.
In my opinion.
But hey- it's still light years ahead of Monochrome Lufthansa. MonoHansa?

nikeson13 wrote:

Out on the runway. IMO, the gold swoosh could hug the grey belly a bit more.

Why does the registration appear to have been taped on, when it is in fact the actual registration?

audidudi wrote:

nikeson13 wrote:

Out on the runway. IMO, the gold swoosh could hug the grey belly a bit more.

Why does the registration appear to have been taped on, when it is in fact the actual registration?

That isn't the actual registration. Actual registration is N67501.

CONTACREW wrote:

audidudi wrote:

nikeson13 wrote:

Out on the runway. IMO, the gold swoosh could hug the grey belly a bit more.

Why does the registration appear to have been taped on, when it is in fact the actual registration?

That isn't the actual registration. Actual registration is N67501.

Oops! My mistake! I should've looked it up first on the FAA Registry! I didn't recognize it as a Boeing temp. registration!

nikeson13 wrote:

Out on the runway. IMO, the gold swoosh could hug the grey belly a bit more.

I don't know, when we saw that original picture from the front of the plane, I wasn't sure, but now seeing the profile, I think it looks great. If this is what United had chosen to do early after the merger or when the first 787 arrived, it would have been a really fresh update that would last a while. At this point, I think it looks great, but I'm not sure its the kind of update that last them 20 years, if they were to invest the money to repaint the entire fleet. One thing that works in their favor is that it is similar enough to the current livery that there is not much harm in having a mixed fleet of old and new. I don't think it risks being Delta with 3 different liveries.

753:
N78866 entered MIA 2789/12Apr for slimlines
N57868 exited RFD 2803/16Apr with slimlines and ISP in F/E+
This completes the ISP program for all mainline aircraft.

763:
N643UA en route to HNL with Polaris - don't see a replacement into HKG for Polaris mod yet.

CriticalPoint wrote:

So it seems like all the domestic projects are wrapping up. All aircraft have PDE, All but 405 have scimitars and all but 705 have new seats.


What is the next project to start? 738/739 new first class? updating the interiors to Polaris like the new A319s? Any idea if there is a plan to fix the location of the FA call button on the domestic 777? Will the PS birds get Scimitars?

As far as I know, the buttons on the domestic 777s have been recessed into the armrests.

So it seems like all the domestic projects are wrapping up. All aircraft have PDE, All but 405 have scimitars and all but 705 have new seats.


What is the next project to start? 738/739 new first class? updating the interiors to Polaris like the new A319s? Any idea if there is a plan to fix the location of the FA call button on the domestic 777? Will the PS birds get Scimitars?

FlightLevel360 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

So it seems like all the domestic projects are wrapping up. All aircraft have PDE, All but 405 have scimitars and all but 705 have new seats.


What is the next project to start? 738/739 new first class? updating the interiors to Polaris like the new A319s? Any idea if there is a plan to fix the location of the FA call button on the domestic 777? Will the PS birds get Scimitars?

As far as I know, the buttons on the domestic 777s have been recessed into the armrests.

Thats the problem (unless they have been recessed deeper) everyones elbow hits the button and they constantly ding for the entire flight. Its been 6 months since iv been on a domestic 777 so maybe they have already fixed it.

calpsafltskeds wrote:

753:
N78866 entered MIA 2789/12Apr for slimlines
N57868 exited RFD 2803/16Apr with slimlines and ISP in F/E+
This completes the ISP program for all mainline aircraft.

763:
N643UA en route to HNL with Polaris - don't see a replacement into HKG for Polaris mod yet.

659UA was supposed to go last week.. I would think it still next on the list.. We’ll see soon enough

CriticalPoint wrote:

FlightLevel360 wrote:

CriticalPoint wrote:

So it seems like all the domestic projects are wrapping up. All aircraft have PDE, All but 405 have scimitars and all but 705 have new seats.


What is the next project to start? 738/739 new first class? updating the interiors to Polaris like the new A319s? Any idea if there is a plan to fix the location of the FA call button on the domestic 777? Will the PS birds get Scimitars?

As far as I know, the buttons on the domestic 777s have been recessed into the armrests.

Thats the problem (unless they have been recessed deeper) everyones elbow hits the button and they constantly ding for the entire flight. Its been 6 months since iv been on a domestic 777 so maybe they have already fixed it.

Yeah, they've made it much deeper.

Here's a video that demonstrates the new buttons: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_nKULvDU1k&t=113s

For all of you 767 on the same route peeps.

FYI Flight 52 IAD-ZRH transitions to 787-800 service on April 23rd for the season.

nikeson13 wrote:

Out on the runway. IMO, the gold swoosh could hug the grey belly a bit more.

I don’t get the love for the wave, it’s ok, perhaps modernizes a tad. But I do not think this is the “new livery” at all nor a sign of what’s to come. For me it should have just been a signal of “new tech”

For me the globe needs a total rework and more - BUT ONLY AFTER MOST OF ALL POLARIS IS COMPLETE

Some updates from United’s new Fleet Plan released with their Q1 Results:

Total CR2’s at year-end 122 (likely will see a few of the Skywest birds retired)
Total ER4’s at year-end 177 (looks like a few more will be pulled back into service for ExpressJet as the CommutAir fleet continues to grow)

UA Confims purchase of 20 used A319s (EasyJet) for delivery 2020-2021
7 more of the ex-CZ A319s should be delivered in 2019

Still to be delivered in 2018:
2 77W (one imminent and last one Q4)
3 78J (all Nov-Dec)
3 763 (ex-HA, Q3-4)
10 7M9 (deliveries starting this month)