• 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
 
FSDan
Posts: 1827
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Thu May 10, 2018 8:59 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
FSDan wrote:
If you look through UA's schedules in some detail, you'll notice that their average turn times are longer than what AA and DL schedule for the same aircraft types. I've mostly noticed this on the narrowbody side. Even for 50-seat RJs, you probably won't find a turn less than 30 minutes on UA while AA and DL are doing 25 minutes.

And? If UA's stage length is longer they are doing less turns per day, thus spending less time on the ground and more in the air... Turn time =/= utilization.

Average Stage Length by Carrier (May18)

Narrowbodies:
UA 1,239mi
DL 1,175
AA 1,104

Regionals:
UA 543mi
DL 479mi
AA 455mi


Fair point, although stage length isn't the whole picture either. If airline A utilizes a 737-800 on two transcon flights in a day totaling 11 hours of flying time, while airline B utilizes the same type of aircraft on 6 2-hour flights during the same day, airline A will have a much higher average stage length while airline B has higher utilization.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3351
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Fri May 11, 2018 12:41 am

FSDan wrote:
Fair point, although stage length isn't the whole picture either. If airline A utilizes a 737-800 on two transcon flights in a day totaling 11 hours of flying time, while airline B utilizes the same type of aircraft on 6 2-hour flights during the same day, airline A will have a much higher average stage length while airline B has higher utilization.

If you want to provide the average fleet counts for UA/DL/AA for some period of time I'm happy to pull the block hours so we can do a utilization calculation. I'm just telling you that due to having 4 coastal hubs UA's utilization tends to be higher because they fly long haul missions and spend minimal time on the ground.
 
United1
Posts: 3585
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Fri May 11, 2018 2:30 am

Rdh3e wrote:
FSDan wrote:
Fair point, although stage length isn't the whole picture either. If airline A utilizes a 737-800 on two transcon flights in a day totaling 11 hours of flying time, while airline B utilizes the same type of aircraft on 6 2-hour flights during the same day, airline A will have a much higher average stage length while airline B has higher utilization.

If you want to provide the average fleet counts for UA/DL/AA for some period of time I'm happy to pull the block hours so we can do a utilization calculation. I'm just telling you that due to having 4 coastal hubs UA's utilization tends to be higher because they fly long haul missions and spend minimal time on the ground.


There is actually some existing data, admittedly from 2016, that might clear some of this up:


Average Daily Block Hour Utilization of Total Operating Fleet
DL 10.35 hours
UA 10.28
AA 10.11

Average Daily Airborne Hours of Total Operating Fleet
UA 10.29 hours
DL 8.84
AA 8.59

So what that data tells me is DL squeezes a few more flights on average per aircraft than UA does but UA keeps those aircraft in the air quite a bit more than DL or AA do.

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/Airc ... lated.html
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3351
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Fri May 11, 2018 11:24 am

United1 wrote:
There is actually some existing data, admittedly from 2016, that might clear some of this up:

It helps, but those numbers are way too low. It's likely they include spares or are not properly accounting for out if service aircraft. None of the majors are clocking less than 11 hours on their mainline fleet.

UA also underwent a pretty significant increase in utilization in 2017 that won't be represented here regardless of the numbers were right.
 
masseybrown
Posts: 5188
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 2:40 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Fri May 11, 2018 2:43 pm

As fuel prices continue to rise, you have to wonder if UA regrets bringing all those 50-seaters back into service.
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Fri May 11, 2018 3:07 pm

masseybrown wrote:
As fuel prices continue to rise, you have to wonder if UA regrets bringing all those 50-seaters back into service.


I would assume they’re not viewing them as a long term solution given how old those planes are.
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Fri May 11, 2018 4:04 pm

masseybrown wrote:
As fuel prices continue to rise, you have to wonder if UA regrets bringing all those 50-seaters back into service.


I was under the impression the CRJs coming onboard were offset at least somewhat by reductions in ERJs but I was wrong. It's 43 additional CRJs and ERJs, net of 3 ER3 retirements, 36 also net of the Q200s. That's quite an increase. Is this a new peak or still less than several years ago? Where are the ERJs coming from?

http://ir.united.com/company-informatio ... y-overview
 
Rdh3e
Posts: 3351
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:09 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sat May 12, 2018 12:40 pm

jetero wrote:
Where are the ERJs coming from?

UA has been moving ERJs from EV to both C5 and AX over the past two years. It's likely that the variance is just the timing of those swaps.
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sat May 12, 2018 1:44 pm

Rdh3e wrote:
jetero wrote:
Where are the ERJs coming from?

UA has been moving ERJs from EV to both C5 and AX over the past two years. It's likely that the variance is just the timing of those swaps.


Got it, thanks
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Topic Author
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 5:55 pm

I'm trying to understand these east coast changes announced this week http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1393953&hilit=ua+east+coast. I like them, but they don't make sense.
I thought I remember hearing something from UA a few months ago about banking EWR to match AA at PHL. Cutting small markets and upgauging doesn't seem to fit with this, especially as O/D primarily and mainline only at EWR with "growth" and connections" at IAD also mutually incompatible, or at least I don't understand them.
If flow traffic is being moved to IAD it moves volume away from EWR, making those mainline upgauges hard to fill.
Unless frequency is being drastically reduced at EWR I find it hard to imagine UA will fly even 4x A319 EWR-MEM. (3x ERJ now, increasing to 4x in fall)
They've got to be looking at smaller planes; trying to O/D focus a 400 flight/day operation at EWR (New York) for a carrier like UA will trash yields if they pull connecting traffic away.

Making IAD a greater connecting point makes some sense, but then there's the cost issue.
Only thing I can think is that even with IAD's high costs, EWR is even MORE expensive.
Also maybe the removal of slot restrictions at EWR gives UA less reason to slot-squat.

The problem with IAD as a hub, though, is that its extremely limited in terms of Florida service. Mainline to ORF, PWM, IND, CVG, etc. is great, but what do you fill those planes with without high-volume markets to source from.
Something like this is needed (at a minimum) to help fill those new mainline flights.
IAD-PBI
IAD-RSW
IAD-MIA
IAD-JAX (mainline added)
IAD-VPS

So UA now has major growth plans (at least from statements) at ORD, DEN, IAH, LAX, EWR, and IAD.
Interesting to see SFO, the major growth engine in the past, left out....(but UA has pulled the trigger against AS more quietly there)

Since DEN is UA's "most profitable" hub according to Kirby; but ORD+DEN+IAH have a combined margin 10% below (ATL+DTW+MSP+DFW+CLT for AA and DL) IAH and ORD must be much lower in profit to make the math work out.

Also as Kirby has said UA is more profitable than AA and DL at LAX and NYC, it seems that UA's hubs can be ranked (roughly) as follows in profitability.

1. DEN
2. SFO
3. EWR
4. ORD
5. LAX
6. IAH
7. IAD (assumption)

Interesting to see what seems to fall out from Kirby's statements, DEN was most surprising to me, and with all the positives he has said (hub x is so profitable!), how come UA is underperforming AA and DL?
I guess AA and DL's "strategic moves" must be losing money or near-break-even (LAX and SEA), but I guess that is to be expected. What that means then is that ORD and IAH must be poor performers for UA, again making DEN's performance (when it was once rumored to be closed in the Smisek years) more surprising....
Its a convoluted subject, but again Kirby always seems to have a surprise......wonder if Mexico is unprofitable given this https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/278602/united-airlines-mexico-service-changes-from-late-june-2018/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+airlineroutenews+%28Airlineroute%29
UA DL LH NW AA --- Next DEN-IND (UA TBD)
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5357
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 5:59 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
I'm trying to understand these east coast changes announced this week http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1393953&hilit=ua+east+coast. I like them, but they don't make sense.
I thought I remember hearing something from UA a few months ago about banking EWR to match AA at PHL. Cutting small markets and upgauging doesn't seem to fit with this, especially as O/D primarily and mainline only at EWR with "growth" and connections" at IAD also mutually incompatible, or at least I don't understand them.
If flow traffic is being moved to IAD it moves volume away from EWR, making those mainline upgauges hard to fill.
Unless frequency is being drastically reduced at EWR I find it hard to imagine UA will fly even 4x A319 EWR-MEM. (3x ERJ now, increasing to 4x in fall)
They've got to be looking at smaller planes; trying to O/D focus a 400 flight/day operation at EWR (New York) for a carrier like UA will trash yields if they pull connecting traffic away.

Making IAD a greater connecting point makes some sense, but then there's the cost issue.
Only thing I can think is that even with IAD's high costs, EWR is even MORE expensive.
Also maybe the removal of slot restrictions at EWR gives UA less reason to slot-squat.

The problem with IAD as a hub, though, is that its extremely limited in terms of Florida service. Mainline to ORF, PWM, IND, CVG, etc. is great, but what do you fill those planes with without high-volume markets to source from.
Something like this is needed (at a minimum) to help fill those new mainline flights.
IAD-PBI
IAD-RSW
IAD-MIA
IAD-JAX (mainline added)
IAD-VPS

So UA now has major growth plans (at least from statements) at ORD, DEN, IAH, LAX, EWR, and IAD.
Interesting to see SFO, the major growth engine in the past, left out....(but UA has pulled the trigger against AS more quietly there)

Since DEN is UA's "most profitable" hub according to Kirby; but ORD+DEN+IAH have a combined margin 10% below (ATL+DTW+MSP+DFW+CLT for AA and DL) IAH and ORD must be much lower in profit to make the math work out.

Also as Kirby has said UA is more profitable than AA and DL at LAX and NYC, it seems that UA's hubs can be ranked (roughly) as follows in profitability.

1. DEN
2. SFO
3. EWR
4. ORD
5. LAX
6. IAH
7. IAD (assumption)

Interesting to see what seems to fall out from Kirby's statements, DEN was most surprising to me, and with all the positives he has said (hub x is so profitable!), how come UA is underperforming AA and DL?
I guess AA and DL's "strategic moves" must be losing money or near-break-even (LAX and SEA), but I guess that is to be expected. What that means then is that ORD and IAH must be poor performers for UA, again making DEN's performance (when it was once rumored to be closed in the Smisek years) more surprising....
Its a convoluted subject, but again Kirby always seems to have a surprise......wonder if Mexico is unprofitable given this https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/278602/united-airlines-mexico-service-changes-from-late-june-2018/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+airlineroutenews+%28Airlineroute%29


You're making a LOT of assumptions.

You think IAH is less profitable than LAX???? That makes zero sense whatsoever. LAX-PVG/SIN have garbage fares and domestic flying is more profitable than international flying right now. LAX's domestic flying is super high in competition while they get IAH's domestic routes to themselves.

IAH took a dive for two reasons in the last few years for two reasons:

1) Harvey
2) Oil crash

Harvey is over and done with and oil is stable now. Its not going to be $100 a barrel again, but its probably going to stabilize at $60-70 a barrel which will keep oil flying profitable.
Last edited by LAXdude1023 on Sun May 13, 2018 6:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Next flight: IAH-UIO-IAH on UA in Y
 
flyguy84
Posts: 632
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 6:10 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
I'm trying to understand these east coast changes announced this week http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1393953&hilit=ua+east+coast. I like them, but they don't make sense.
I thought I remember hearing something from UA a few months ago about banking EWR to match AA at PHL. Cutting small markets and upgauging doesn't seem to fit with this, especially as O/D primarily and mainline only at EWR with "growth" and connections" at IAD also mutually incompatible, or at least I don't understand them.
If flow traffic is being moved to IAD it moves volume away from EWR, making those mainline upgauges hard to fill.
Unless frequency is being drastically reduced at EWR I find it hard to imagine UA will fly even 4x A319 EWR-MEM. (3x ERJ now, increasing to 4x in fall)
They've got to be looking at smaller planes; trying to O/D focus a 400 flight/day operation at EWR (New York) for a carrier like UA will trash yields if they pull connecting traffic away.

Making IAD a greater connecting point makes some sense, but then there's the cost issue.
Only thing I can think is that even with IAD's high costs, EWR is even MORE expensive.
Also maybe the removal of slot restrictions at EWR gives UA less reason to slot-squat.

The problem with IAD as a hub, though, is that its extremely limited in terms of Florida service. Mainline to ORF, PWM, IND, CVG, etc. is great, but what do you fill those planes with without high-volume markets to source from.
Something like this is needed (at a minimum) to help fill those new mainline flights.
IAD-PBI
IAD-RSW
IAD-MIA
IAD-JAX (mainline added)
IAD-VPS

So UA now has major growth plans (at least from statements) at ORD, DEN, IAH, LAX, EWR, and IAD.
Interesting to see SFO, the major growth engine in the past, left out....(but UA has pulled the trigger against AS more quietly there)

Since DEN is UA's "most profitable" hub according to Kirby; but ORD+DEN+IAH have a combined margin 10% below (ATL+DTW+MSP+DFW+CLT for AA and DL) IAH and ORD must be much lower in profit to make the math work out.

Also as Kirby has said UA is more profitable than AA and DL at LAX and NYC, it seems that UA's hubs can be ranked (roughly) as follows in profitability.

1. DEN
2. SFO
3. EWR
4. ORD
5. LAX
6. IAH
7. IAD (assumption)

Interesting to see what seems to fall out from Kirby's statements, DEN was most surprising to me, and with all the positives he has said (hub x is so profitable!), how come UA is underperforming AA and DL?
I guess AA and DL's "strategic moves" must be losing money or near-break-even (LAX and SEA), but I guess that is to be expected. What that means then is that ORD and IAH must be poor performers for UA, again making DEN's performance (when it was once rumored to be closed in the Smisek years) more surprising....
Its a convoluted subject, but again Kirby always seems to have a surprise......wonder if Mexico is unprofitable given this https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/278602/united-airlines-mexico-service-changes-from-late-june-2018/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+airlineroutenews+%28Airlineroute%29

Hubs at IAD/EWR/SFO are inherently high cost and eat into the profits.
SFO
 
User avatar
janders
Posts: 434
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2017 4:27 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 6:16 pm

According to Kirby - UA is the most profitable airline at LAX, having best margins

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... es-441829/

I doubt IAH is that profitable as it had some of its wind knocked out of it with the oil economy and later hurricane issues. Also lets remember UA was forced to adapt and change IAH hub into more a connection facility than local O&D as prior in attempt to improve its performance.
"We make war that we may live in peace." -- Aristotle
 
codc10
Posts: 2228
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 6:24 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
I'm trying to understand these east coast changes announced this week http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1393953&hilit=ua+east+coast. I like them, but they don't make sense.
I thought I remember hearing something from UA a few months ago about banking EWR to match AA at PHL. Cutting small markets and upgauging doesn't seem to fit with this, especially as O/D primarily and mainline only at EWR with "growth" and connections" at IAD also mutually incompatible, or at least I don't understand them.
If flow traffic is being moved to IAD it moves volume away from EWR, making those mainline upgauges hard to fill.
Unless frequency is being drastically reduced at EWR I find it hard to imagine UA will fly even 4x A319 EWR-MEM. (3x ERJ now, increasing to 4x in fall)
They've got to be looking at smaller planes; trying to O/D focus a 400 flight/day operation at EWR (New York) for a carrier like UA will trash yields if they pull connecting traffic away.


The airspace, airfield configuration and real estate preclude EWR from having a fully-banked operation like Kirby discussed soon after he arrived. IAD on the other hand, can support it. It would be much easier for UA to implement a banked schedule there to maximize connectivity.

UA isn't walking away from EWR connections.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5357
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 8:37 pm

janders wrote:
According to Kirby - UA is the most profitable airline at LAX, having best margins

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... es-441829/

I doubt IAH is that profitable as it had some of its wind knocked out of it with the oil economy and later hurricane issues. Also lets remember UA was forced to adapt and change IAH hub into more a connection facility than local O&D as prior in attempt to improve its performance.


A couple of things:

1) In 2017, the hurricane was a much bigger issue than oil. Oil flying has recovered pretty well. The hurricane kept the airport shut for days basically ruining its margins for the year due to lost revenue. However, this is an issue of the past. Hurricanes are rare and don't happen that often, so Harvey cannot be factored into how profitable IAH is in 2018.

2) IAH is right at about 55% connections, 45% O&D. Compared to a place like ATL, DFW, CLT, etc. that is a very high ratio of O&D traffic. IAH, has always been about around that mark even back to the CO days give or take few percent.
Next flight: IAH-UIO-IAH on UA in Y
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Topic Author
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 11:00 pm

LAXdude1023 wrote:
janders wrote:
According to Kirby - UA is the most profitable airline at LAX, having best margins

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... es-441829/

I doubt IAH is that profitable as it had some of its wind knocked out of it with the oil economy and later hurricane issues. Also lets remember UA was forced to adapt and change IAH hub into more a connection facility than local O&D as prior in attempt to improve its performance.


A couple of things:

1) In 2017, the hurricane was a much bigger issue than oil. Oil flying has recovered pretty well. The hurricane kept the airport shut for days basically ruining its margins for the year due to lost revenue. However, this is an issue of the past. Hurricanes are rare and don't happen that often, so Harvey cannot be factored into how profitable IAH is in 2018.

2) IAH is right at about 55% connections, 45% O&D. Compared to a place like ATL, DFW, CLT, etc. that is a very high ratio of O&D traffic. IAH, has always been about around that mark even back to the CO days give or take few percent.


Sorry, I really don't know, tried to figure it out fast, with Kirby's stements everythings seems to be on top.....wasn't sure what to put on the bottom...
IAH is about the closest things UA has to a fortress hub (WN I know...) so it should be very profitable
UA DL LH NW AA --- Next DEN-IND (UA TBD)
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
jayunited
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun May 13, 2018 11:20 pm

janders wrote:
According to Kirby - UA is the most profitable airline at LAX, having best margins

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... es-441829/

I doubt IAH is that profitable as it had some of its wind knocked out of it with the oil economy and later hurricane issues. Also lets remember UA was forced to adapt and change IAH hub into more a connection facility than local O&D as prior in attempt to improve its performance.


IAH was always a major connection hub for CO. CO had both strong O&D numbers and utilized IAH as a connection hub.

UA re-banked IAH to improve connection times it had nothing to do with financial performance. Legacy UA always banked their mid-continent hubs a certain way, when a bank would depart to the West Coast nothing was departing to the East Coast (except flights to LGA and DCA) and vice versa the next bank would have everything leaving to the East Coast and nothing going West. This practice was carried over when the merger took place and CO hubs like IAH adopted this policy which really hurt connecting passengers the result was some passengers would end up with a 4-5 hour connection window. Scott Kirby has often stated in his town halls that when he was at AA he never understood why UA set up their hubs this way because it totally inconveniences 30%-50% of connecting passengers in any particular bank especially passenger who arrive on a international flight. Whereas re-banking and creating omni-directional hubs means 85% of all connecting passenger should be on a connecting flight within 2.5 hours of arriving at a hub. This is why IAH, DEN and ORD have been re-banked and in fact under Kirby UA has added additional banks at all of these hubs and the results are connecting passengers are spending less time on the ground at an airport they really don't want to be at in the first place.
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Topic Author
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon May 14, 2018 2:02 am

So the solution is to make an 8am bank for example have flights both east and west, the 10am bank the same, and so on?
Good, otherwise a close in city, CRP, for IAH for example may only be able to be fed in one direction.

Any idea what the DEN rebanking will look like?

I think they should do something similiar with 8am, 10am, 12pm, 3pm, 7-8pm, and 10pm omnidirectional banks. Copy DL at SLC a bit with a late night westbound focus (seems to have started already)
UA DL LH NW AA --- Next DEN-IND (UA TBD)
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
blockski
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon May 14, 2018 1:23 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
I'm trying to understand these east coast changes announced this week http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1393953&hilit=ua+east+coast. I like them, but they don't make sense.
I thought I remember hearing something from UA a few months ago about banking EWR to match AA at PHL. Cutting small markets and upgauging doesn't seem to fit with this, especially as O/D primarily and mainline only at EWR with "growth" and connections" at IAD also mutually incompatible, or at least I don't understand them.
If flow traffic is being moved to IAD it moves volume away from EWR, making those mainline upgauges hard to fill.
Unless frequency is being drastically reduced at EWR I find it hard to imagine UA will fly even 4x A319 EWR-MEM. (3x ERJ now, increasing to 4x in fall)
They've got to be looking at smaller planes; trying to O/D focus a 400 flight/day operation at EWR (New York) for a carrier like UA will trash yields if they pull connecting traffic away.


I think you're struggling to understand this because you're reading the statement too literally. UA isn't going to stop offering connections over EWR at all. But they're going to focus growth at EWR on upgauging; they also want to capture more O/D out of the New York market, which means that those connections have to go someplace else. And IAD is the obvious choice.

Making IAD a greater connecting point makes some sense, but then there's the cost issue.
Only thing I can think is that even with IAD's high costs, EWR is even MORE expensive.
Also maybe the removal of slot restrictions at EWR gives UA less reason to slot-squat.


Yes, EWR's stated CPE is more expensive than IAD's.

But remember that CPE is an average. UA can drive those costs down with more volume, since most of the costs are fixed. Also, IAD's high costs are a bit misleading - UA pays cheaper rent for the crappier C/D concourses than what MWAA charges for A/B. International gateway airports also tend to have higher CPE stats because you have more foreign airlines operating just one or two flights a day (or less) with the extra fees for CBP and fewer flights to amortize those costs over...

UA noted that for all of their gates at IAD, they are only really constrained by those gates for one of their four banks (the mid-afternoon bank with the bulk of the European departures). They can add more flights to their other banks, or add additional banks at relatively low cost.

The problem with IAD as a hub, though, is that its extremely limited in terms of Florida service. Mainline to ORF, PWM, IND, CVG, etc. is great, but what do you fill those planes with without high-volume markets to source from.
Something like this is needed (at a minimum) to help fill those new mainline flights.
IAD-PBI
IAD-RSW
IAD-MIA
IAD-JAX (mainline added)
IAD-VPS


Yes, this is a weakness of UA's network out of IAD, and I would hope/expect this to change going forward if UA is serious about this strategy.
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Topic Author
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Wed May 16, 2018 9:35 pm

UA just announced weekly ORD-BRO (Brownsville, TX)

Starting November 3, 2018, its weekly on a E175 with leisure focused schedules (morning outbound, afternoon return)
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/united-airlines-to-fly-nonstop-from-brownsville-to-chicago/article_fd6217de-579f-11e8-b786-5ba417effd1c.html
https://www.united.com/web/en-US/apps/travel/timetable/results.aspx?Origin=ORD&Destination=BRO&Date=11/3/2018&Time=%20&NonStop=False&NumFlight=50&FLN=

ORD 9:00 - BRO12:29 E75 6
BRO 13:30 - ORD 16:35 E75 6

4x ERJ to IAH remain (5x in October)
Its interesting to see BRO-ORD, DL serves MSP-HRL as its sole link to the valley region, and I would have thought UA would do ORD-HRL first, if at all, so this was a surprise.

MFE and HRL see more service from United than BRO (MFE-IAH is 3x ERJ, 2x 73G on an October weekday, and HRL-IAH is 3x ERJ, 1x E70) [once again greater for both in October] making BRO-ORD still more of a surprise.

In other routes ORD-FSD gets a MORNING mainline flight (A320) in the fall (UA schdules are interesting as DL typically (for routes which have mainline) offers a RON mainline frequency, making this midmorning turn, when the rest of the flights are CR2/E75s more interesting. (an E75 ORD-FSD continues to DEN, while a CR2 does the reverse DEN-FSD-ORD)

MCI seems to have gotten some luv err mainness err.... mainline with MCI-ORD at 2x CR7, 1x 320, 1x 73G, 1x 73H, 1x 739 in October, MCI-DEN at 3x CR7, 1x E70, 1x E75, 1x 73H, MCI-SFO at 1x 73H, 1x E75, MCI-EWR at 1x E70, 2x 73G, and MCI-IAH at 1x ERJ, 1x E70, 1x E75, 1x A319, 1x 739. Only MCI-IAD is all regional (2x CR7) and there is only one 50 seat jet (an ERJ to IAH) in the schedule. I hope MCI and RDU, etc. are the model for United's future schedules/ service at similar sized cities (with more mainline to Denver....) but I like the way it looks. October 5th, the test day I picked is still a long way off though, hope this nice (for UA) schedule sticks.

Thanks Scott....

Still overall good to see United bulking up its (and mainline in particular) network.
UA DL LH NW AA --- Next DEN-IND (UA TBD)
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
YRflier
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:11 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Wed May 16, 2018 10:46 pm

I agree BRO over HRL and MFE is a bit of a head scratcher. HRL flies more people to Chicago than any area airport (WN), and MFE has more capacity with American and United than BRO. Weird.
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Wed May 16, 2018 10:52 pm

YRflier wrote:
I agree BRO over HRL and MFE is a bit of a head scratcher. HRL flies more people to Chicago than any area airport (WN), and MFE has more capacity with American and United than BRO. Weird.


Pretty sure BRO is closest to S Padre Island, although HRL is more central to other RGV destinations.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 22868
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Wed May 16, 2018 11:11 pm

jayunited wrote:
This is why IAH, DEN and ORD have been re-banked and in fact under Kirby UA has added additional banks at all of these hubs and the results are connecting passengers are spending less time on the ground at an airport they really don't want to be at in the first place.


Actually, IAH bank count was reduced from 10 to 8, while ORD was formally rebanked having been a more continuous schedule in recent years.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
YRflier
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:11 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Thu May 17, 2018 12:16 am

jetero wrote:
YRflier wrote:
I agree BRO over HRL and MFE is a bit of a head scratcher. HRL flies more people to Chicago than any area airport (WN), and MFE has more capacity with American and United than BRO. Weird.


Pretty sure BRO is closest to S Padre Island, although HRL is more central to other RGV destinations.



It is by around 20 minutes, but HRL is more or less the midpoint between SPI and the larger McAllen area (45 minutes in either direction). There is a plan to build a toll road just north of HRL that adds another east-west artery in the area (1.4 million people) and would connect to a second causeway to the island. That would probably shave another 10 minutes on the HRL to SPI I commute.
 
User avatar
drerx7
Posts: 4327
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:19 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Thu May 17, 2018 1:59 am

Yup...this is about S. Padre Island snowbirds.
HOUSTON, TEXAS
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Topic Author
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Thu May 17, 2018 2:13 am

Any ideas on how the DEN re-banked schedule will look?
UA DL LH NW AA --- Next DEN-IND (UA TBD)
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
MCIRNO
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 2:49 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Thu May 17, 2018 3:01 am

SumChristianus wrote:

MCI seems to have gotten some luv err mainness err.... mainline with MCI-ORD at 2x CR7, 1x 320, 1x 73G, 1x 73H, 1x 739 in October, MCI-DEN at 3x CR7, 1x E70, 1x E75, 1x 73H, MCI-SFO at 1x 73H, 1x E75, MCI-EWR at 1x E70, 2x 73G, and MCI-IAH at 1x ERJ, 1x E70, 1x E75, 1x A319, 1x 739. Only MCI-IAD is all regional (2x CR7) and there is only one 50 seat jet (an ERJ to IAH) in the schedule. I hope MCI and RDU, etc. are the model for United's future schedules/ service at similar sized cities (with more mainline to Denver....) but I like the way it looks. October 5th, the test day I picked is still a long way off though, hope this nice (for UA) schedule sticks.


I agree, that's a lot of mainline, especially from EWR and IAH. The two flights from SFO are probably a way to fight AS and their recent build up.
 
VC10er
Posts: 3639
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Thu May 17, 2018 2:42 pm

I think the massive ad spend in NYC and Metropolitan Area promoting EWR must be working. At launch the ads were very weak, they have greatly improved the design, visual impact and messaging since.
With the mega Polaris Lounge opening at the end of the month, EWR will be a great experience for international O/D...the only thing left are the aircraft reconfigurations.
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
jayunited
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon May 21, 2018 10:02 pm

At a recent event in Houston, Scott Kirby told attendees in the coming years UA could add new nonstop service to 20 new cities from IAH including international destinations. He also stated UA is growing IAH and expects to hit 700 flights a day up from 540 although no time frame was given for when we should expect IAH to hit the 700 mark.

My question is what new international destinations could UA add from IAH? Will UA finally restore IAH-CDG or perhaps offer new service to other European cities or perhaps UA is looking to grow in South America? Although these next two seem highly unlikely what are the prospects of UA serving Africa or China from IAH?

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/new ... yptr=yahoo
 
77H
Posts: 1111
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 12:03 am

jayunited wrote:
At a recent event in Houston, Scott Kirby told attendees in the coming years UA could add new nonstop service to 20 new cities from IAH including international destinations. He also stated UA is growing IAH and expects to hit 700 flights a day up from 540 although no time frame was given for when we should expect IAH to hit the 700 mark.

My question is what new international destinations could UA add from IAH? Will UA finally restore IAH-CDG or perhaps offer new service to other European cities or perhaps UA is looking to grow in South America? Although these next two seem highly unlikely what are the prospects of UA serving Africa or China from IAH?

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/new ... yptr=yahoo


I read a different article about this conference with Kirby as the keynote speaker. I wouldn't read so much into it as it may just be an act of buttering up Houston city leadership. Last year UA announced a massive increase of flights and seats to the Hawaii market. Much of that expansion is now scheduled to be drawn down. It goes without saying that the Houston market is way different than the Hawaiian Islands but service was announced, implemented only to be drawn down again. I'll be convinced once the route announcements happen, the flights start. Then we see if they actually last.

Fuel is going up, which is good for the IAH market in certain ways but may still result in routes being cut from IAH and other places throughout the system as fuel shifts the economics from profitable to unprofitable.

77H
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 1:19 am

77H wrote:
jayunited wrote:
At a recent event in Houston, Scott Kirby told attendees in the coming years UA could add new nonstop service to 20 new cities from IAH including international destinations. He also stated UA is growing IAH and expects to hit 700 flights a day up from 540 although no time frame was given for when we should expect IAH to hit the 700 mark.

My question is what new international destinations could UA add from IAH? Will UA finally restore IAH-CDG or perhaps offer new service to other European cities or perhaps UA is looking to grow in South America? Although these next two seem highly unlikely what are the prospects of UA serving Africa or China from IAH?

https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/new ... yptr=yahoo


I read a different article about this conference with Kirby as the keynote speaker. I wouldn't read so much into it as it may just be an act of buttering up Houston city leadership. Last year UA announced a massive increase of flights and seats to the Hawaii market. Much of that expansion is now scheduled to be drawn down. It goes without saying that the Houston market is way different than the Hawaiian Islands but service was announced, implemented only to be drawn down again. I'll be convinced once the route announcements happen, the flights start. Then we see if they actually last.

Fuel is going up, which is good for the IAH market in certain ways but may still result in routes being cut from IAH and other places throughout the system as fuel shifts the economics from profitable to unprofitable.

77H


What was announced (rather expounded on) was fully consistent with the plans to develop the mid continent hubs (DEN, IAH, and ORD) over the next 3 years. Capacity at IAH planned to increase 6% in 2018, and 7% each in 2019 and 2020, over 3.5 million additional annual enplaned passengers. If those plans hold of course there will be 20 new destinations added (most probably being added back after being cut). Of course high fuel prices or a crisis could derail those plans.
 
User avatar
FlightLevel360
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 1:45 am

I'm sorry if anyone mentioned this already, but isn't there an EWR-PIT flight that switches over to mainline next month? If so, how long will this last?
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 881
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 2:08 am

FlightLevel360 wrote:
I'm sorry if anyone mentioned this already, but isn't there an EWR-PIT flight that switches over to mainline next month? If so, how long will this last?


1 hr 28 mins according to United.com.


:lol:
 
User avatar
FlightLevel360
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Tue May 22, 2018 3:11 am

SFOtoORD wrote:
FlightLevel360 wrote:
I'm sorry if anyone mentioned this already, but isn't there an EWR-PIT flight that switches over to mainline next month? If so, how long will this last?


1 hr 28 mins according to United.com.


:lol:


Oh my god, I am so sorry! I meant to phrase the question as "How long will the mainline flights between EWR and PIT remain in the schedule," not the actual duration of the flight!

xD
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Topic Author
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Wed May 30, 2018 4:35 pm

Mentioned before (gates), but quite interesting quotes/statistics.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... on-449043/
"Already in 2018, flights at Denver are scheduled to increase by 3.3% year-over-year, and seats by 3.5%, FlightGlobal schedule data shows. United is scheduled to increase flights by 10.9% and seats by 7.2%, while Southwest will reduce flights by 1.7% and seats by 0.5%."
UA growing faster than WN......

"Denver's future is akin to what Hartsfield is for Delta," United chief executive Oscar Munoz told local employees during the week of 7 May. "[Denver is] going to be for United the Hartsfield."
I'd like to see that, but I doubt UA can ever turn DEN into a fortress.
For comparison, short haul feed routes (DEN-ABQ on UA compared to ATL-SAV on DL) diverge widely on capacity.
DEN-ABQ in November (approximate) 1x ERJ, 1x CR7, 1x 319, 1x 739
ATL-SAV in November 11x MD88. (11x daily mainline!)
Quite the disparity, also UA at DEN is around 1/3 the size of DL at ATL in terms of seat capacity. Don't see that changing anytime soon.
UA DL LH NW AA --- Next DEN-IND (UA TBD)
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Wed May 30, 2018 4:46 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
Mentioned before (gates), but quite interesting quotes/statistics.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... on-449043/
"Already in 2018, flights at Denver are scheduled to increase by 3.3% year-over-year, and seats by 3.5%, FlightGlobal schedule data shows. United is scheduled to increase flights by 10.9% and seats by 7.2%, while Southwest will reduce flights by 1.7% and seats by 0.5%."
UA growing faster than WN......

"Denver's future is akin to what Hartsfield is for Delta," United chief executive Oscar Munoz told local employees during the week of 7 May. "[Denver is] going to be for United the Hartsfield."
I'd like to see that, but I doubt UA can ever turn DEN into a fortress.
For comparison, short haul feed routes (DEN-ABQ on UA compared to ATL-SAV on DL) diverge widely on capacity.
DEN-ABQ in November (approximate) 1x ERJ, 1x CR7, 1x 319, 1x 739
ATL-SAV in November 11x MD88. (11x daily mainline!)
Quite the disparity, also UA at DEN is around 1/3 the size of DL at ATL in terms of seat capacity. Don't see that changing anytime soon.


It's impossible due to the major disparity in size for the hub's natural catchment area.
 
User avatar
SumChristianus
Topic Author
Posts: 533
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2018 3:00 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 7:09 pm

According to CVGComair, CVG-IAH sees an upgauge to a mainline A320 on one frequency in July. Very close in upgrade but service is down to 3x daily, and I believe 50 seat jets are back in the schedule for CVG. It had been all 70+ seat planes for a while for UA.
UA DL LH NW AA --- Next DEN-IND (UA TBD)
"Born in Wonder, Brought to Wisdom"
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 7:13 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
According to CVGComair, CVG-IAH sees an upgauge to a mainline A320 on one frequency in July. Very close in upgrade but service is down to 3x daily, and I believe 50 seat jets are back in the schedule for CVG. It had been all 70+ seat planes for a while for UA.


18 fewer flights for the month of June but slight increase in capacity with 22 A320 operations.

Total capacity in market is down more than 20% due to end of F9 nonstop.
 
User avatar
cvgComair
Posts: 1903
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2016 3:48 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 9:53 pm

SumChristianus wrote:
According to CVGComair, CVG-IAH sees an upgauge to a mainline A320 on one frequency in July. Very close in upgrade but service is down to 3x daily, and I believe 50 seat jets are back in the schedule for CVG. It had been all 70+ seat planes for a while for UA.

I am only seeing <=50 seaters to fill in frequency on Saturdays. It looks like the normal schedule is still all CRJ-700/ERJ-170 or above.
Next: PWM-JFK (Delta CRJ-900), JFK-CVG Delta CRJ-900)
DL FO, A319/320/332/333, B712/722/732/733/738/739/752/753/763/764/772/773/788, CRJ-100/2/7/9, ERJ-145/75, MD-88/90, S340
 
splitterz
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:40 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 11:17 pm

I'd love to see more Eastern European added by United. PRG, BUD, maybe even WAW.

Wonder how AA is doing with their PRG and BUD flights..
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 11:40 pm

Seems like there are a few of DEN - spoke city pairs that are single roundtrips. Not sure they have the planes/gates to do it, but double daily would be nice for connectivity to the network.

I also agree that if a truly profitable 100-110 seater can fit in their business plan, the resulting upgauge of Express flights from additional E175 orders would put more butts in seats from these higher yielding markets.

Does this group think they are so busy assimilating the order of 737MAX and widebodies in that the smaller narrow body is just not important enough right now from a capital outlay standpoint?
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1446
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 11:50 pm

sldispatcher wrote:
Seems like there are a few of DEN - spoke city pairs that are single roundtrips. Not sure they have the planes/gates to do it, but double daily would be nice for connectivity to the network.

I also agree that if a truly profitable 100-110 seater can fit in their business plan, the resulting upgauge of Express flights from additional E175 orders would put more butts in seats from these higher yielding markets.

Does this group think they are so busy assimilating the order of 737MAX and widebodies in that the smaller narrow body is just not important enough right now from a capital outlay standpoint?


I think if UA were to order a NSNB (CS1, E190/195), they would have already done it by now. The plan going forward seems to be 1) upgauging bigger 738/739 markets with more/newer 739s, 2) sending 73G/A319/A320/738s to smaller markets, 3) buying used A319s, 4) keeping the 50 seaters, and eventually 5) trying to ask pilots for scope relief for more E175s (good luck with that one).
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:13 am

intotheair wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
Seems like there are a few of DEN - spoke city pairs that are single roundtrips. Not sure they have the planes/gates to do it, but double daily would be nice for connectivity to the network.

I also agree that if a truly profitable 100-110 seater can fit in their business plan, the resulting upgauge of Express flights from additional E175 orders would put more butts in seats from these higher yielding markets.

Does this group think they are so busy assimilating the order of 737MAX and widebodies in that the smaller narrow body is just not important enough right now from a capital outlay standpoint?


I think if UA were to order a NSNB (CS1, E190/195), they would have already done it by now. The plan going forward seems to be 1) upgauging bigger 738/739 markets with more/newer 739s, 2) sending 73G/A319/A320/738s to smaller markets, 3) buying used A319s, 4) keeping the 50 seaters, and eventually 5) trying to ask pilots for scope relief for more E175s (good luck with that one).


I wonder if reducing 50 seat flying in exchange for more 75 seaters would be palatable to the pilots? For instance, take away 1.2 50 seaters for every 75 seater addition? I'm expecting the 319's to give relief to some of the CRJ700/E175 markets so they can further retire 50 seaters. I guess the pilots have no reason to give if that is the case. Let it occur organically. If oil stays up, I'm sure market forces will also come into play.

Looks like about August 20 or so is next schedule input. We got serious Express upgauging for the summer here. Will see if it extends beyond the August 20/22 timeframe.
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:21 am

cvgComair wrote:
SumChristianus wrote:
According to CVGComair, CVG-IAH sees an upgauge to a mainline A320 on one frequency in July. Very close in upgrade but service is down to 3x daily, and I believe 50 seat jets are back in the schedule for CVG. It had been all 70+ seat planes for a while for UA.

I am only seeing <=50 seaters to fill in frequency on Saturdays. It looks like the normal schedule is still all CRJ-700/ERJ-170 or above.


Yes only 4 ERJ frequencies for the month.

Last time I checked though CLE remains heavily ERJ, which is a head scratcher, but I guess everyone is funneled through ORD.
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:23 am

intotheair wrote:
sldispatcher wrote:
Seems like there are a few of DEN - spoke city pairs that are single roundtrips. Not sure they have the planes/gates to do it, but double daily would be nice for connectivity to the network.

I also agree that if a truly profitable 100-110 seater can fit in their business plan, the resulting upgauge of Express flights from additional E175 orders would put more butts in seats from these higher yielding markets.

Does this group think they are so busy assimilating the order of 737MAX and widebodies in that the smaller narrow body is just not important enough right now from a capital outlay standpoint?


I think if UA were to order a NSNB (CS1, E190/195), they would have already done it by now. The plan going forward seems to be 1) upgauging bigger 738/739 markets with more/newer 739s, 2) sending 73G/A319/A320/738s to smaller markets, 3) buying used A319s, 4) keeping the 50 seaters, and eventually 5) trying to ask pilots for scope relief for more E175s (good luck with that one).


The contract is up in Jan, right? So I agree, the ship has sailed and UA is banking on a new scope formula.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 338
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:25 am

I hope that both sides don't forget about the customers in the back. This past week, the disparity between the quality of the ride in the ERJ-175 and the CRJ200 wasn't even a contest, yet we are asked to pay a premium for the latter. I'm hoping that both sides can find a workable compromise for the sake of the bottom line and the passenger. I'm thinking if oil stays at $80 bbl United might be a sore loser in regards to the CSeries.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1686
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:30 am

jetero wrote:
...The contract is up in Jan, right? So I agree, the ship has sailed and UA is banking on a new scope formula.


Under the Railway Labor Act, the contract becomes amendable, not expired. So the contract stays in force until it's replaced by another.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:38 am

FlyHossD wrote:
jetero wrote:
...The contract is up in Jan, right? So I agree, the ship has sailed and UA is banking on a new scope formula.


Under the Railway Labor Act, the contract becomes amendable, not expired. So the contract stays in force until it's replaced by another.


Sure. But certainly this must have been a factor in evaluating whether or not to purchase the small narrow bodies?

Or am I wrong?

Are there active negotiations now?
 
jetero
Posts: 4115
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 3:45 am

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 12:48 am

sldispatcher wrote:
I hope that both sides don't forget about the customers in the back. This past week, the disparity between the quality of the ride in the ERJ-175 and the CRJ200 wasn't even a contest, yet we are asked to pay a premium for the latter.


Sadly that was the short-sighted MO of both PMUA and PMCO.
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 5357
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: United Airlines Network Thread 2018

Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:11 am

SumChristianus wrote:
Mentioned before (gates), but quite interesting quotes/statistics.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... on-449043/
"Already in 2018, flights at Denver are scheduled to increase by 3.3% year-over-year, and seats by 3.5%, FlightGlobal schedule data shows. United is scheduled to increase flights by 10.9% and seats by 7.2%, while Southwest will reduce flights by 1.7% and seats by 0.5%."
UA growing faster than WN......

"Denver's future is akin to what Hartsfield is for Delta," United chief executive Oscar Munoz told local employees during the week of 7 May. "[Denver is] going to be for United the Hartsfield."
I'd like to see that, but I doubt UA can ever turn DEN into a fortress.
For comparison, short haul feed routes (DEN-ABQ on UA compared to ATL-SAV on DL) diverge widely on capacity.
DEN-ABQ in November (approximate) 1x ERJ, 1x CR7, 1x 319, 1x 739
ATL-SAV in November 11x MD88. (11x daily mainline!)
Quite the disparity, also UA at DEN is around 1/3 the size of DL at ATL in terms of seat capacity. Don't see that changing anytime soon.


Im not sure if his statements are pandering or ignorance. DEN will never be ATL. EVER. On a domestic level, it might be able to get within 90% of number of destinations served. On an international level, ATL will dwarf DEN until eternity.
Next flight: IAH-UIO-IAH on UA in Y
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos