jayunited
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 10, 2019 1:54 pm

KVH68 wrote:
Looks like United is trying to build a two bay 737 hangar in Tampa

https://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/ne ... ty-at.html


This is long over due and absolutely necessary for United's operations in TPA. Having a 2 bay hangar will provide maintenance a place to work inside, it will also provide another place UA a place to park RON aircraft and not take up valuable gate space. Hopefully this new hangar will bring more work in house and reduce some of the burden on the hubs. If I'm not mistaken MCO and a few other line stations conducts "A" checks on the 737 fleet. I'm not sure if "C" checks are done at MCO but it would be nice if TPA after this hangar is built gets in on some of that action and starts performing some of the "A" checks on RON aircraft. This will free up the hubs to focus on other larger maintenance issues.

Lastly if (and it's a very big if) the long term strategy is to grow TPA say 5%-10% percent UA will need a hangar.But suspect this is about trying to get the operation to run more smoothly by getting more line stations involved in performing overnight maintenance on aircraft.
 
UA777FO
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 2:35 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 10, 2019 2:39 pm

I agree but everyone is asking why The pilots won’t budge on scope and that is the question I am answering.
 
EssentialBusDC
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:37 pm

strfyr51 wrote:
United787 wrote:
Couldn't UA just bring in 70-seaters and 100-seaters as mainline as part of the current scope?

UAlpa has proposed flying 100 seaters to aallow for larger UAX airplanes (which the company rejected) They know once the UALPA pilots fly the larger regional airplanes? They'll propose bringing in ALL the regional airplanes (and Pilots) on board. The company might be gullible, But they're NOT stupid. They can see a takeover plan in mind. Hell! I can see a takeover plan in the Plot and Scheme!


UA ALPA hasn’t proposed flying 100 seaters in the current negotiations because it is already in the contract. Management has agreed that anything over 76 seats are mainline, and any increase in the number of 76 seaters at Express is tied to ordering the New Small Narrow Body (NSNB). A clause management has yet to utilize. Should they do so fully, the amount of 70/76 seaters allowed would be equal to the amount Delta currently has.

What UA ALPA has proposed in these negotiations is to bring the 76 seaters on as a mainline aircraft as well. With it being mainline, there are no limits in the weight, seat count, number of aircraft, mileage , and ratio of block hours etc. The 175E2 would be in compliance despite it being grossly over the current weight limit, and probably would have 80-82 passengers versus 76.

As far as additional costs, UAL already owns a significant amount of the 76 seaters, some of the hubs (if not all) are already staffed with above and below wing by mainline employees, so bringing them to mainline means Pilots, Mechanics, and Flight Attendants, as well as additional dispatchers, routers etc to handle the increase in flying. But you aren’t having to pay a third party, at a profit for those contractors, to do provide those services either.

So yes an increase in costs, but also an increase in revenue, and operational flexibility.

I believe it’s not really an economic decision by management to not order a NSNB, or bring the 76 seaters onto mainline, but rather a philosophical one. They are so engrained to Express and outsourcing. It would require a fundamental shift in their thinking to do such a thing. A giant step they just can’t take, even though Delta has already shown them the way with the 100 seaters.

DC
 
EssentialBusDC
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:06 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:48 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
39M:
N47512 exited SEA Induction 2745/9Feb - no first revenue flight shown yet.

Looks like there's lots of room on the east side of the TPA airport.

DL flies the CJR900 and UA doesn't - in what ways are scope different to allow the CRJ900 at DL but not at UA?

Just wondering if the MD95 flown by UA mainline crews would allow UA to bring in more 75 seat aircraft? I don't think so. Kind of like UA buying 100+ new 737MAX and 40 used Airbus 319/320 and 737s.

How is this fair that while UA adds new and used mainline aircraft, only some aircraft types qualify to allow more larger express aircraft and not even on a 1 to 1 basis?


The CRJ-900 could be flown at Express as long as it complies with this:

76-Seat Aircraft” means aircraft configured with more than seventy (70) passenger seats but no more than seventy-six (76) passenger seats, and certificated in the United States for ninety (90) or fewer passenger seats and with a maximum United States certificated gross takeoff weight of 86,000 or fewer pounds.



It has nothing to do with fairness. It is what was negotiated in the current pilot contract. Management agreed to those specific aircraft listed, and the ratio is exactly what Delta did with the 717. But since there are a finite number of 717’s to be had, it wasn’t included as a permitted type. The RJ scope limits (seats, weights, number allowed) are exactly the same. How is that unfair?

Delta has been adding 737’s and 321’s too, but those don’t allow more 76 seaters. Is that unfair to Delta?
 
User avatar
FlightLevel360
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:55 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
39M:
N47512 exited SEA Induction 2745/9Feb - no first revenue flight shown yet.

Looks like there's lots of room on the east side of the TPA airport.

DL flies the CJR900 and UA doesn't - in what ways are scope different to allow the CRJ900 at DL but not at UA?

Just wondering if the MD95 flown by UA mainline crews would allow UA to bring in more 75 seat aircraft? I don't think so. Kind of like UA buying 100+ new 737MAX and 40 used Airbus 319/320 and 737s.

How is this fair that while UA adds new and used mainline aircraft, only some aircraft types qualify to allow more larger express aircraft and not even on a 1 to 1 basis?


What role can a CS100 play in UA's fleet? What routes would it work on? UA doesn't have that many routes where using a 100-seater would be better than a 738 or A320.
It's not the A220. It's the Bombardier CSeries. Period.
Long live the A380 and 747!
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1840
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:27 pm

B737900ER wrote:
UA777FO wrote:
our pilot costs are the same, it’s up to management to compete with the pilot contract that they signed, with scope they agreed too.

The pilots are just one cost. Believe it or not, it takes more than a pilot to operate a flight.


Very true - but IIRC, it's only the pilot's and dispatcher's contracts that have Scope limits - that's why any changes to Scope start with the pilots.

Pre-merger, UAL/Tilton furloughed at about 2,000 pilots after changing the Scope limits to permit 70 seat RJs, but with the promise of preserving their pension. And then, UAL/Tilton dumped the pilot's pension, too. A lot of L-UAL pilots who were affected by that are still at UA, so the memory of the pilot group is not in favor of more liberal Scope clauses. "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2302
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 12:40 am

jayunited wrote:
Also with the LAX reduction we now know where the 789 for SFO-AMS is coming from especially since UA isn't slated to take delivery of any more 789s till 2020. However since SFO-AMS is year around UA will still need to find a 789 to operate this route come October when both LAX and IAH-SYD resume daily operations. Perhaps the frame will come from the SFO-MUC flight, but Polaris installations for the 787-8/9s start this fall as well. It will be interesting to see what our fall/winter schedule looks like in terms of shuffling around the entire 787 fleet to accommodate Polaris installation and new flights which will include SFO-MEL and DEL both on 789's. Personally I think some 787-10s will find their way to SFO and perhaps even LAX to cover some TATL 789 routes for the 2019 fall/winter season.


Technically, I believe UA could have covered the loaded summer 789 schedule as it was with both LAX-SYD and IAH-SYD as daily flights, but there would have been no operational spares in a fleet of 25. Now there should be a bit of wiggle room in case of weather delays, tech problems, etc.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
GmoneyCO
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 2:22 pm

772:
N228UA - Scheduled for test hop on 13-Feb. Should return to service shortly after
 
blockski
Posts: 425
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:30 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 2:48 pm

I am curious if Delta management were more willing to go for 100-seaters based on Northwest's experience with the smaller DC-9 variants. Almost all of those were retired just as the merger was happening (I don't think any of those planes were even repainted in Delta's colors), but I get the sense that the combined management's familiarity with the economics of ~110 seaters was a big factor in their taking on the 717s, and thus also the A220.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2168
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:27 pm

The scope position taken by UA was a bit surprising to the pilots as they thought that issue was settled and buried. The fact UA is raising the issue will slow down the negotiations as the pilots aren't about to budge on that subject. Why would they? There is a pilot shortage which will increase in the next few years.

What seems to be missing is an analysis of the true cost/benefit of bringing regional flying to the mainline. UA could import the pay scales from the regionals (with some adjustments which could be negotiated) and increase the seat count to maximize revenue. All of the new variations of regional jets would be welcome and UA could add a smaller mainline type to bridge the E175 to 737/319 gap if they felt it would be profitable.
 
codc10
Posts: 2391
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 4:40 pm

blockski wrote:
(I don't think any of those planes were even repainted in Delta's colors)


Only the DC-9-50s made it to the new Delta colors. The -10s were gone before the merger, the -30s went away in 2010, and the -40s were retired in 2011. The -50s stuck around to 2014.

SonomaFlyer wrote:
The scope position taken by UA was a bit surprising to the pilots as they thought that issue was settled and buried. The fact UA is raising the issue will slow down the negotiations as the pilots aren't about to budge on that subject. Why would they? There is a pilot shortage which will increase in the next few years.


I think Scott Kirby was a bit naive and overly optimistic about the prospects of UA pilots relaxing on scope. I'd be willing to forgive that miscalculation and chalk it up to him being new to the job.
 
VC10er
Posts: 3865
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:33 pm

An entirely different question than scope or refits.

For many, many months at EWR there has been a huge plywood wall that has cordoned off an enormous area before security in TC. The architectural images on the wall show the large wide open space United is creating that will open up the whole security area for better foot traffic.

Does anyone know the completion date for this? I have not been counting the months, but it seems like well over a year that it’s under construction?

I am assuming this is a United paid renovation and not the Port Authority. As no “structure” seems to be in the plans, it does seem like a very long project and sometimes the security lanes are packed with many hundreds of people.

Curious, Thanks
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
codc10
Posts: 2391
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:44 pm

VC10er wrote:
An entirely different question than scope or refits.

For many, many months at EWR there has been a huge plywood wall that has cordoned off an enormous area before security in TC. The architectural images on the wall show the large wide open space United is creating that will open up the whole security area for better foot traffic.

Does anyone know the completion date for this? I have not been counting the months, but it seems like well over a year that it’s under construction?

I am assuming this is a United paid renovation and not the Port Authority. As no “structure” seems to be in the plans, it does seem like a very long project and sometimes the security lanes are packed with many hundreds of people.

Curious, Thanks


That's a United project, and has been underway since early summer 2018. It involves decking over a previously-open atrium space to enlarge the circulation area for the security checkpoint/maze. A few escalators to the level 2 check-in area and level 1 baggage claim are part of the plan. A similar project at C-1 was completed last year. I'm not sure of expected completion date but it should be getting close.
 
VC10er
Posts: 3865
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:00 pm

codc10 wrote:
VC10er wrote:
An entirely different question than scope or refits.

For many, many months at EWR there has been a huge plywood wall that has cordoned off an enormous area before security in TC. The architectural images on the wall show the large wide open space United is creating that will open up the whole security area for better foot traffic.

Does anyone know the completion date for this? I have not been counting the months, but it seems like well over a year that it’s under construction?

I am assuming this is a United paid renovation and not the Port Authority. As no “structure” seems to be in the plans, it does seem like a very long project and sometimes the security lanes are packed with many hundreds of people.

Curious, Thanks


That's a United project, and has been underway since early summer 2018. It involves decking over a previously-open atrium space to enlarge the circulation area for the security checkpoint/maze. A few escalators to the level 2 check-in area and level 1 baggage claim are part of the plan. A similar project at C-1 was completed last year. I'm not sure of expected completion date but it should be getting close.


Gosh! Only since last summer! Feels like watching paint peel- I’m there too often! Lol I’m certain it will be a big improvement. Thanks
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
pabloeing
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:04 pm

¿how many B78X now in UA?....¿deliveries in 2019 and 2020?
 
United1
Posts: 3752
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:40 pm

pabloeing wrote:
¿how many B78X now in UA?....¿deliveries in 2019 and 2020?


3 in service, 1 undergoing induction at IAD and 7 more to be delivered from Boeing in 2019. There may not be any 787-10s delivered in 2020 might be 13 787-9s instead.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
VC10er
Posts: 3865
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:46 am

“Instead”- less than 14 787-10’s? Or the balance comes after 2020?
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
United1
Posts: 3752
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:58 am

VC10er wrote:
“Instead”- less than 14 787-10’s? Or the balance comes after 2020?


The balance comes online a few years down the road although I would take with a grain of salt.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
Cmac787
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 2:02 pm

N1004 78X exit IAD induction. F2736 IAD-EWR 12Feb. First Revenue flight scheduled F637 EWR-SFO 14feb.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2805
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 3:24 pm

789:
N45956 exited AMA paint 2757/11Feb
 
GmoneyCO
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 3:56 pm

763:
N660UA - Scheduled to exit HKG on 14-Feb/2766.
 
audidudi
Posts: 1905
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:35 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 4:08 pm

calpsafltskeds wrote:
789:
N45956 exited AMA paint 2757/11Feb

How many B787s have been affected and have to be repainted due to original paint issues from the factory? Does anyone know exactly what the problem is/was?
 
aviator96
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:04 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:14 pm

763: N662UA is scheduled to ferry EWR-HNL UA2768 and then HNL-HKG UA2769 on the 15th.
Is this for maintenance or Polaris? With 660 leaving the 14th I would think Polaris, but on the united fleet site 662 is listed under "no Polaris"
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2805
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 12:14 am

audidudi wrote:
calpsafltskeds wrote:
789:
N45956 exited AMA paint 2757/11Feb

How many B787s have been affected and have to be repainted due to original paint issues from the factory? Does anyone know exactly what the problem is/was?

The below could have been touchup, but most likely a full repaint.
788 N27901, delivered in 2012, repainted in 2018 at FTW
788 N28912, delivered in 2014, repainted in 2018 at FTW
789 N45956, delivered in 2015, repainted in 2019 at AMA
789 N27958, delivered in 2015, repainted in 2018 at AMA
 
jayunited
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 12:36 am

FSDan wrote:
jayunited wrote:
Also with the LAX reduction we now know where the 789 for SFO-AMS is coming from especially since UA isn't slated to take delivery of any more 789s till 2020. However since SFO-AMS is year around UA will still need to find a 789 to operate this route come October when both LAX and IAH-SYD resume daily operations. Perhaps the frame will come from the SFO-MUC flight, but Polaris installations for the 787-8/9s start this fall as well. It will be interesting to see what our fall/winter schedule looks like in terms of shuffling around the entire 787 fleet to accommodate Polaris installation and new flights which will include SFO-MEL and DEL both on 789's. Personally I think some 787-10s will find their way to SFO and perhaps even LAX to cover some TATL 789 routes for the 2019 fall/winter season.


Technically, I believe UA could have covered the loaded summer 789 schedule as it was with both LAX-SYD and IAH-SYD as daily flights, but there would have been no operational spares in a fleet of 25. Now there should be a bit of wiggle room in case of weather delays, tech problems, etc.


Maybe they could have but I think you are forgetting about DEN-FRA which starts this year in addition to these seasonal returns DEN-LHR and SFO-ZRH. Although these routes will be on 788's those 788's are being pulled from routes that will most likely be upguaged to a 789 from spring through fall also do forget about the seasonal SFO-MUC on the 789. Until this announcement I not sure (but I could be wrong) that there was a 789 available for SFO-AMS and like you correctly pointed out the need for spares to cover any tech problems.

Also the 787-8/9 Polaris installation begins this year although I'm not 100% sure if installation begins in the summer or the fall. But I do know United will have some 787-8/9s with Polaris and PE by the time the 2020 deliveries of our 789's arrive.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2302
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:45 am

jayunited wrote:
FSDan wrote:
jayunited wrote:
Also with the LAX reduction we now know where the 789 for SFO-AMS is coming from especially since UA isn't slated to take delivery of any more 789s till 2020. However since SFO-AMS is year around UA will still need to find a 789 to operate this route come October when both LAX and IAH-SYD resume daily operations. Perhaps the frame will come from the SFO-MUC flight, but Polaris installations for the 787-8/9s start this fall as well. It will be interesting to see what our fall/winter schedule looks like in terms of shuffling around the entire 787 fleet to accommodate Polaris installation and new flights which will include SFO-MEL and DEL both on 789's. Personally I think some 787-10s will find their way to SFO and perhaps even LAX to cover some TATL 789 routes for the 2019 fall/winter season.


Technically, I believe UA could have covered the loaded summer 789 schedule as it was with both LAX-SYD and IAH-SYD as daily flights, but there would have been no operational spares in a fleet of 25. Now there should be a bit of wiggle room in case of weather delays, tech problems, etc.


I think you are forgetting about DEN-FRA which starts this year in addition to these seasonal returns DEN-LHR and SFO-ZRH. Although these routes will be on 788's those 788's are being pulled from routes that will most likely be upguaged to a 789 from spring through fall also do forget about the seasonal SFO-MUC on the 789. Until this announcement I not sure (but I could be wrong) that there was a 789 available for SFO-AMS and like you correctly pointed out the need for spares to cover any tech problems.


I'm pretty sure I wasn't forgetting anything - I was looking directly at the summer schedules and figuring out what the minimum # of aircraft in each fleet would be to cover the scheduled flying.

788 - 12 out of 12 frames
SFO-IAD x1 (redeye)
SFO-ZRH
SFO-CTU (3x weekly)
SFO-PPT (3x weekly)
DEN-IAD x1
DEN-LHR
DEN-FRA
DEN-NRT
IAD-LHR x1
IAD-ZRH
IAD-PEK

789 - 23 out of 25 frames (post Australia reduction)
SFO-AMS
SFO-MUC
SFO-HND
SFO-KIX
SFO-ICN x1
SFO-PVG x2
SFO-SIN x2
SFO-SYD
LAX-IAH x1
LAX-LHR
LAX-NRT
LAX-PVG
LAX-SYD (3x weekly)
LAX-MEL
IAH-LHR x1
IAH-SYD (4x weekly)

My numbers are taking into account the actual schedules of the flights and how they fit together. I believe there need to be 2 789s that RON at SFO to make the schedule work with long enough turn times throughout the day, and for the 788s there's one that RONs at DEN and one that RONs at IAD each night.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
Cmac787
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:50 am

N12004 78X f2736 IAD-EWR cancelled. Rescheduled 2-13
 
VC10er
Posts: 3865
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 2:58 am

Is United happy with just 12 788’s? OR, given that they switched to the 789 rather quickly are they actually 12 ac they would prefer not even having?

It makes sense as they are smaller to open up a route, yet I read the economics of the 788 v 789 are not that different. So, would UA ever order more 788’s to open or right size more long thin routes, or is it simply much better to maintain a far larger fleet of 789’s, and only small: 12/14 788 & 78J, respectively?

Last, would (potentially!!!) the 797 be able to replace some 787 flying, or will the 797 just be too short ranged?
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
aviator96
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:04 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 4:00 am

788: N27903 enroute UAL2758 IAD-AMA
 
aviator96
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:04 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:05 am

763:
N660UA Ferry UAL2767 HNL-ORD Feb 14
772:
N228UA scheduled ferry UAL2733 XMN-HKG on the 15th then continuing on as UAL896 HKG-ORD.
Not showing yet, but a good chance N228UA swaps with N220UA who is operating the inbound. N220UA showing no Polaris
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2805
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 7:34 am

772:
N215UA sked to exit HKG maint 2775/15Feb
N228UA sked to exit XMN 2733/15Feb with Polaris/PE
N782UA sked to enter XMN 2735/15Feb for Polaris/PE
 
jayunited
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:31 pm

FSDan wrote:
jayunited wrote:
FSDan wrote:

Technically, I believe UA could have covered the loaded summer 789 schedule as it was with both LAX-SYD and IAH-SYD as daily flights, but there would have been no operational spares in a fleet of 25. Now there should be a bit of wiggle room in case of weather delays, tech problems, etc.


I think you are forgetting about DEN-FRA which starts this year in addition to these seasonal returns DEN-LHR and SFO-ZRH. Although these routes will be on 788's those 788's are being pulled from routes that will most likely be upguaged to a 789 from spring through fall also do forget about the seasonal SFO-MUC on the 789. Until this announcement I not sure (but I could be wrong) that there was a 789 available for SFO-AMS and like you correctly pointed out the need for spares to cover any tech problems.


I'm pretty sure I wasn't forgetting anything - I was looking directly at the summer schedules and figuring out what the minimum # of aircraft in each fleet would be to cover the scheduled flying.

788 - 12 out of 12 frames
SFO-IAD x1 (redeye)
SFO-ZRH
SFO-CTU (3x weekly)
SFO-PPT (3x weekly)
DEN-IAD x1
DEN-LHR
DEN-FRA
DEN-NRT
IAD-LHR x1
IAD-ZRH
IAD-PEK

789 - 23 out of 25 frames (post Australia reduction)
SFO-AMS
SFO-MUC
SFO-HND
SFO-KIX
SFO-ICN x1
SFO-PVG x2
SFO-SIN x2
SFO-SYD
LAX-IAH x1
LAX-LHR
LAX-NRT
LAX-PVG
LAX-SYD (3x weekly)
LAX-MEL
IAH-LHR x1
IAH-SYD (4x weekly)

My numbers are taking into account the actual schedules of the flights and how they fit together. I believe there need to be 2 789s that RON at SFO to make the schedule work with long enough turn times throughout the day, and for the 788s there's one that RONs at DEN and one that RONs at IAD each night.


Your final statement just proved the point. If there were no reduction in the LAX-SYD frequency UA wouldn't have an aircraft for SFO-AMS because at no point in time does UA run a schedule without have a few spares to step in when another frame is down for maintenance. In 2019 do to the expanded use of 789's from spring to fall there had to be a reduction somewhere within the 787 fleet to make SFO-AMS work and still have spares on hand. Running LAX-SYD 1x daily and SFO-AMS 1x daily would have resulted in 0 frames but the way I calculated (again I could be wrong) UA would have been at least 1 frame short. Your own post states "post Australian reduction" take away the Australian reduction at LAX and I don't see a frame available for SFO-AMS while still running IAH-SYD 4x weekly.
 
FSDan
Posts: 2302
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 4:51 pm

jayunited wrote:
FSDan wrote:
jayunited wrote:

I think you are forgetting about DEN-FRA which starts this year in addition to these seasonal returns DEN-LHR and SFO-ZRH. Although these routes will be on 788's those 788's are being pulled from routes that will most likely be upguaged to a 789 from spring through fall also do forget about the seasonal SFO-MUC on the 789. Until this announcement I not sure (but I could be wrong) that there was a 789 available for SFO-AMS and like you correctly pointed out the need for spares to cover any tech problems.


I'm pretty sure I wasn't forgetting anything - I was looking directly at the summer schedules and figuring out what the minimum # of aircraft in each fleet would be to cover the scheduled flying.

788 - 12 out of 12 frames
SFO-IAD x1 (redeye)
SFO-ZRH
SFO-CTU (3x weekly)
SFO-PPT (3x weekly)
DEN-IAD x1
DEN-LHR
DEN-FRA
DEN-NRT
IAD-LHR x1
IAD-ZRH
IAD-PEK

789 - 23 out of 25 frames (post Australia reduction)
SFO-AMS
SFO-MUC
SFO-HND
SFO-KIX
SFO-ICN x1
SFO-PVG x2
SFO-SIN x2
SFO-SYD
LAX-IAH x1
LAX-LHR
LAX-NRT
LAX-PVG
LAX-SYD (3x weekly)
LAX-MEL
IAH-LHR x1
IAH-SYD (4x weekly)

My numbers are taking into account the actual schedules of the flights and how they fit together. I believe there need to be 2 789s that RON at SFO to make the schedule work with long enough turn times throughout the day, and for the 788s there's one that RONs at DEN and one that RONs at IAD each night.


Your final statement just proved the point. If there were no reduction in the LAX-SYD frequency UA wouldn't have an aircraft for SFO-AMS because at no point in time does UA run a schedule without have a few spares to step in when another frame is down for maintenance. In 2019 do to the expanded use of 789's from spring to fall there had to be a reduction somewhere within the 787 fleet to make SFO-AMS work and still have spares on hand. Running LAX-SYD 1x daily and SFO-AMS 1x daily would have resulted in 0 frames but the way I calculated (again I could be wrong) UA would have been at least 1 frame short. Your own post states "post Australian reduction" take away the Australian reduction at LAX and I don't see a frame available for SFO-AMS while still running IAH-SYD 4x weekly.


Even with LAX-SYD and IAH-SYD both as daily flights, there would still be a frame available for SFO-AMS, but with 0 operational spares. With a fleet of 25, I agree with you that it would be pushing it for UA to try to operate that schedule reliably with no spares.

However, I do want to point out that with the 788 fleet UA does appear to fly a schedule that requires all 12 frames to be in the regular rotation (so no full-time spares). However, to make this feasible, there are long ground times for multiple aircraft (one RON at IAD, one RON at DEN, long ground times including RONs some days at SFO) in which routine maintenance work could be performed. Also, it's a smaller fleet overall.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
codc10
Posts: 2391
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2000 7:18 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 6:13 pm

FSDan wrote:
jayunited wrote:
FSDan wrote:

I'm pretty sure I wasn't forgetting anything - I was looking directly at the summer schedules and figuring out what the minimum # of aircraft in each fleet would be to cover the scheduled flying.

788 - 12 out of 12 frames
SFO-IAD x1 (redeye)
SFO-ZRH
SFO-CTU (3x weekly)
SFO-PPT (3x weekly)
DEN-IAD x1
DEN-LHR
DEN-FRA
DEN-NRT
IAD-LHR x1
IAD-ZRH
IAD-PEK

789 - 23 out of 25 frames (post Australia reduction)
SFO-AMS
SFO-MUC
SFO-HND
SFO-KIX
SFO-ICN x1
SFO-PVG x2
SFO-SIN x2
SFO-SYD
LAX-IAH x1
LAX-LHR
LAX-NRT
LAX-PVG
LAX-SYD (3x weekly)
LAX-MEL
IAH-LHR x1
IAH-SYD (4x weekly)

My numbers are taking into account the actual schedules of the flights and how they fit together. I believe there need to be 2 789s that RON at SFO to make the schedule work with long enough turn times throughout the day, and for the 788s there's one that RONs at DEN and one that RONs at IAD each night.


Your final statement just proved the point. If there were no reduction in the LAX-SYD frequency UA wouldn't have an aircraft for SFO-AMS because at no point in time does UA run a schedule without have a few spares to step in when another frame is down for maintenance. In 2019 do to the expanded use of 789's from spring to fall there had to be a reduction somewhere within the 787 fleet to make SFO-AMS work and still have spares on hand. Running LAX-SYD 1x daily and SFO-AMS 1x daily would have resulted in 0 frames but the way I calculated (again I could be wrong) UA would have been at least 1 frame short. Your own post states "post Australian reduction" take away the Australian reduction at LAX and I don't see a frame available for SFO-AMS while still running IAH-SYD 4x weekly.


Even with LAX-SYD and IAH-SYD both as daily flights, there would still be a frame available for SFO-AMS, but with 0 operational spares. With a fleet of 25, I agree with you that it would be pushing it for UA to try to operate that schedule reliably with no spares.

However, I do want to point out that with the 788 fleet UA does appear to fly a schedule that requires all 12 frames to be in the regular rotation (so no full-time spares). However, to make this feasible, there are long ground times for multiple aircraft (one RON at IAD, one RON at DEN, long ground times including RONs some days at SFO) in which routine maintenance work could be performed. Also, it's a smaller fleet overall.


Don't forget the fact that 787s will be starting Polaris mods at some point during the S19 IATA season.
 
jayunited
Posts: 1950
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:03 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Wed Feb 13, 2019 9:48 pm

FSDan wrote:
Even with LAX-SYD and IAH-SYD both as daily flights, there would still be a frame available for SFO-AMS, but with 0 operational spares. With a fleet of 25, I agree with you that it would be pushing it for UA to try to operate that schedule reliably with no spares.

However, I do want to point out that with the 788 fleet UA does appear to fly a schedule that requires all 12 frames to be in the regular rotation (so no full-time spares). However, to make this feasible, there are long ground times for multiple aircraft (one RON at IAD, one RON at DEN, long ground times including RONs some days at SFO) in which routine maintenance work could be performed. Also, it's a smaller fleet overall.


Like you pointed out there are no spares in the 788 fleet although there will be a few RON's and you are correct there would have been 0 operational spares with the additional SFO-AMS flight I made a mistake with my math so I do apologize. Getting one number wrong throws the whole thing off but you are correct running the summer schedule with no spares is a recipe for disaster.

In other news tail number N228UA is leaving XMN on Feb 15 as UA2733 with Polaris and PE, and tail number N782UA will take its place on Feb 15 as UA2735.

Also tucked away in the update I just saw is tail number N77014 is scheduled to ferry position SFO-HKG Feb 15 as UA2778 pending slot approval. However the information that I saw wasn't specific so I'm not sure if this frame N77014 is going to HKG for Polaris/PE and scheduled heavy maintenance or just for heavy maintenance.
 
fun2fly
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:44 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:41 pm

Looks like 77W N2142U PE Mod Complete: Exit Feb 15. Only 7 more to go!
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2805
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:36 pm

763:
N660UA HKG exit cancelled for now
N662UA noted to enter HKG 2769/15Feb - was n retire list, we'll ahve to see what's going on

772:
N78001 sked to enter HKG 179/14Feb, Polaris, maint or possible slip as turn is being coverd by N78013
N78013 sked to exit HKG 180/16Feb, 31 days not enough time for Polaris, no Polaris seat map

789:
N27964 sked to exit XMN maint 2759/16Feb

78X:
N12004 currently en route on first revenue flight 637/14Feb
 
WeatherPilot
Posts: 334
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 1:51 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:39 pm

UA Announced SYR-DEN daily year-round service today (starting June 6, 2019) using SkyWest E175.

https://twitter.com/SyracuseAirport/sta ... 3959901184
 
User avatar
Runway28L
Posts: 1471
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:54 pm

WeatherPilot wrote:
UA Announced SYR-DEN daily year-round service today (starting June 6, 2019) using SkyWest E175.

https://twitter.com/SyracuseAirport/sta ... 3959901184

DEN-PWM and DEN-GSP have also been added.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... st-455747/

SYR and GSP are year-round on E175s. PWM is summer-only on an A320.
Greetings from KPIT! Check out my photos here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=45 ... teAccepted
 
jplatts
Posts: 2346
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 14, 2019 5:35 pm

Runway28L wrote:
WeatherPilot wrote:
UA Announced SYR-DEN daily year-round service today (starting June 6, 2019) using SkyWest E175.

https://twitter.com/SyracuseAirport/sta ... 3959901184

DEN-PWM and DEN-GSP have also been added.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... st-455747/

SYR and GSP are year-round on E175s. PWM is summer-only on an A320.


There are still some more nonstop routes that could be added by UA at DEN in order to better compete against F9 at DEN, including DEN-ALB, DEN-BMI, DEN-BUF, DEN-GRB, DEN-GSO, DEN-HRL, DEN-MDT, DEN-JAN, DEN-LFT, DEN-MOB, DEN-MYR, DEN-PVD, and DEN-SAV.

I think that UA will likely add at least DEN-BUF and DEN-PVD nonstop service since (a) BUF and PVD are located in two of the largest markets that don't currently have nonstop service out of DEN on UA and (b) UA recently added nonstop service to additional East Coast destinations from DEN in order to better compete against F9 on DEN to East Coast routes.

Will UA add any additional nonstop routes out of DEN like the ones mentioned above?
 
jplatts
Posts: 2346
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:42 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:09 pm

Update: UA also announced DEN-SAV nonstop service in addition to DEN-BTV, DEN-GSP, DEN-PWM, DEN-SYR, and DEN-PNS nonstop service.
 
UAinAUS
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:11 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:02 pm

UAX Update:

CR2:
The final ExpressJet deal shows only 16 CR2s being operated by EV instead of the original 20. All 16 already in service.
N857AS has transferred back to Skywest from ExpressJet (still flying for UAX)

ER4:
N847HK (2004 build) entered the UAX fleet with TransStates. Should be in new TSA livery. This should be the last AX ERJ addition.
 
VC10er
Posts: 3865
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Fri Feb 15, 2019 6:20 pm

I have learned a lot here about how UA is so behind in domestic routes and aiming to remedy that. I think I have a fairly good idea of what ac is being added to catch up. However, in the past couple of years my traveling changed a lot, from the VAST majority of international a year to being about 50/50. (BTW: I not that happy about that, but it’s not where my clients are these days)

Thinking about the upcoming UA domestic fleet, a mix of RJ’s and MAX’s and used Airbuses, got me thinking about the following: in a month I will need an itinerary that originates at EWR, to Boston, the next day from Boston to Columbus OH, the next day Columbus OH to DFW, then the next day back to EWR (in 5 days). It’s the first time where I cannot build an entire itinerary on UA without requiring a stop at a hub. (Except for out and back to EWR)
My question basically is, in the future, probably a good handful of years, will UA have non-hub to non-hub flights?
Do airlines like Delta and AA and Southwest (etc) have non-hub to non-hub NONSTOPS?
Or will it “almost always” be that flying from a secondary city to another secondary city will require being routed through a hub, no matter the airline? (Does make the new 50 seat, and E-170/5’s much more attractive- although short flight times, the buy up into F is frankly not that bad and more conducive to working)
(If I was forced to guess, Southwest would be the best at zigzagging the USA, but not needing an ORD, DFW, MIA, DEN, JFK, IAD etc)
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2805
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:49 pm

VC10er:
Surely UA has the most hub oriented system in the US. There are just a few routes between non-hubs, I think most left over from the CLE hub.
I have thought UA should go through an analysis to determine what non-hub to non-hub flights should be flown. They probably have already. Of course, I don't think routes that go into another airline's major hub would make sense, UA would lose a bundle doing routes like any non-hub UA city to ATL/PHL/DFW/MSP, etc. And, yes, most of the below may not work due to the Southwest influence at most medium sized cities.
Rather I think the main emphasis of non-hub to non-hub flying would be to place UA at an advantage for the flying public to move to Mileage Plus Program. I envision UA do a study to:
1.) Check major airports that do not have hub operators. If Southwest has over something like 40% move on.
2.) Check UA's share of all traffic at each airport in #1.
3.) Find airports that UA had an near equal or greater share of the total traffic.
4.) Search for airport pairs from #3.
5.) Check competition, stage length, O&D to see if routes are viable.
6.) It would be best to concentrate on cities that can add service to multiple markets. This could make UA the preferred airline for those living in a city that is not an airline hub.
Airports that I think might make the cut? Maybe the biggest cities in the US that aren't hubs?
MCO - UA is a large player and services can be added off peak in may cases.
LAS - (heavily influenced by WN and ULCC)
MSY, TPA, PIT, IND, CMH, SDF, STL, MCI, MKE, OMA, ICT, OKC,TUL??
Some potential routes could be RJ and some mainline. Understanding the E175 type aircraft is restricted by the scope clause, I think operating over 50 seats RJs on non-hub to non-hub markts would be a non-starter.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 1840
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:20 am

VC10er wrote:
I have learned a lot here about how UA is so behind in domestic routes and aiming to remedy that. I think I have a fairly good idea of what ac is being added to catch up. However, in the past couple of years my traveling changed a lot, from the VAST majority of international a year to being about 50/50. (BTW: I not that happy about that, but it’s not where my clients are these days)

Thinking about the upcoming UA domestic fleet, a mix of RJ’s and MAX’s and used Airbuses, got me thinking about the following: in a month I will need an itinerary that originates at EWR, to Boston, the next day from Boston to Columbus OH, the next day Columbus OH to DFW, then the next day back to EWR (in 5 days). It’s the first time where I cannot build an entire itinerary on UA without requiring a stop at a hub. (Except for out and back to EWR)
My question basically is, in the future, probably a good handful of years, will UA have non-hub to non-hub flights?
Do airlines like Delta and AA and Southwest (etc) have non-hub to non-hub NONSTOPS?
Or will it “almost always” be that flying from a secondary city to another secondary city will require being routed through a hub, no matter the airline? (Does make the new 50 seat, and E-170/5’s much more attractive- although short flight times, the buy up into F is frankly not that bad and more conducive to working)
(If I was forced to guess, Southwest would be the best at zigzagging the USA, but not needing an ORD, DFW, MIA, DEN, JFK, IAD etc)


Would it make sense for you to learn to fly and fly yourself? Or at least charter aircraft part of the time?
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
crowski31
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 9:51 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:29 am

Is there a way to see which 77W is scheduled for UA862 on 3/9? I'm hoping for premium plus on that flight and figure I have a good chance of getting one of the updated cabins.
 
User avatar
calpsafltskeds
Posts: 2805
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:29 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:29 am

753:
N74856 exited SAT 2730/15Feb with slimlines
Still waiting for N57852 and N57855 at MIA since mid Dec.

77W:
N2333U entered SFO 889/13Feb, PE mod???
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1633
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:45 am

I think UA pursuing point to point would be a bad idea. All of the recent success has centered around building up the existing hubs, and it appears to be working really well.

One big problem I see with point to point for UA is that most of the midsize cities are accounted for. Delta has established sizable operations in a lot of mid market cities in the east and Midwest, and Southwest has gobbled up the rest. The only city that might be left is CLE, and UA doesn’t appear to think there’s any value in having a bigger operation there.

Plus, all of UA’s hubs are major population centers with huge amounts of O&D. There’s a good chance that many fliers in those secondary places are looking to travel to New York, DC, Chicago, San Francisco, et al anyway.
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
 
VC10er
Posts: 3865
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 2:04 am

calpsafltskeds wrote:
VC10er:
Surely UA has the most hub oriented system in the US. There are just a few routes between non-hubs, I think most left over from the CLE hub.
I have thought UA should go through an analysis to determine what non-hub to non-hub flights should be flown. They probably have already. Of course, I don't think routes that go into another airline's major hub would make sense, UA would lose a bundle doing routes like any non-hub UA city to ATL/PHL/DFW/MSP, etc. And, yes, most of the below may not work due to the Southwest influence at most medium sized cities.
Rather I think the main emphasis of non-hub to non-hub flying would be to place UA at an advantage for the flying public to move to Mileage Plus Program. I envision UA do a study to:
1.) Check major airports that do not have hub operators. If Southwest has over something like 40% move on.
2.) Check UA's share of all traffic at each airport in #1.
3.) Find airports that UA had an near equal or greater share of the total traffic.
4.) Search for airport pairs from #3.
5.) Check competition, stage length, O&D to see if routes are viable.
6.) It would be best to concentrate on cities that can add service to multiple markets. This could make UA the preferred airline for those living in a city that is not an airline hub.
Airports that I think might make the cut? Maybe the biggest cities in the US that aren't hubs?
MCO - UA is a large player and services can be added off peak in may cases.
LAS - (heavily influenced by WN and ULCC)
MSY, TPA, PIT, IND, CMH, SDF, STL, MCI, MKE, OMA, ICT, OKC,TUL??
Some potential routes could be RJ and some mainline. Understanding the E175 type aircraft is restricted by the scope clause, I think operating over 50 seats RJs on non-hub to non-hub markts would be a non-starter.


Very interesting read. Thanks! I actually wasn’t holding out hope based on United having such mega cities for hubs. Each one having many domestic secondary destinations and many having onward travel abroad. Even if it was Peoria and a big Caterpillar contract, couldn’t ever envision a nonstop from Peoria to Santa Fe or Bangor Maine, unless they’re other Caterpillar ops there. I just made all that up.

Candidly I could do this trip with the connections and probably make it ok- but as I have learned so often the hardway- that trying to stick to UA metal, can quite tiring and I would naturally run the risk of missed connections, that said I’ve not had a very late flight on UA in many years. Although, unless there is really bad weather when I do go, a snowy Middle West + EWR...

As for the private jet option, not in my budget range!
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 1267
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

Re: United Fleet/Network Thread - 2019

Sat Feb 16, 2019 2:08 am

intotheair wrote:
I think UA pursuing point to point would be a bad idea. All of the recent success has centered around building up the existing hubs, and it appears to be working really well.

One big problem I see with point to point for UA is that most of the midsize cities are accounted for. Delta has established sizable operations in a lot of mid market cities in the east and Midwest, and Southwest has gobbled up the rest. The only city that might be left is CLE, and UA doesn’t appear to think there’s any value in having a bigger operation there.

Plus, all of UA’s hubs are major population centers with huge amounts of O&D. There’s a good chance that many fliers in those secondary places are looking to travel to New York, DC, Chicago, San Francisco, et al anyway.


I agree that hubs are UA's strength, particularly with O&D focused high dollar markets like SFO, LAX and EWR. But I do think there is room for not point to point per se, but a couple little focus cities. The problem is markets change, which is why formerly profitable cities like CLE, PIT and STL (and maybe someday DTW) can no longer sustain hubs. Those populations and the companies that employ them have moved and AA and DL are making steps to identify the hubs of the future, like RDU. If UA doesn't dip their toe in anywhere, they won't be able to expand to new markets the same way. I still think there's room to explore growth in Nashville. It is a booming city, and room in the future for a competitor to WN. Also, being equidistant between IAH and IAD, would allow UA to grow in the south, which is generally their weakest region, and the fastest growing region of the US. Tampa could also be an opportunity, but more of a PHX-style destination focus city, not so much for connections.

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