Q400 first class cabin upgrade list questions

Discussion in 'United Airlines | MileagePlus' started by TravelerRob, May 7, 2014.  |  Print Topic

  1. TravelerRob
    Original Member

    TravelerRob Silver Member

    Messages:
    645
    Likes Received:
    486
    Status Points:
    620
    I have a Q400 flight coming up tomorrow (RDU-IAD) that has a first class cabin. The cabin is zeroed out and the seat map shows all but two seats assigned. That seems pretty normal.

    But on the mobile website the flight does not have an upgrade standby list link. Has anyone seen this before? Note the upgrade list does appear on united.com.

    Thanks,
    Rob
    PS - I don't expect the upgrade even as a 1K. Just really wondering why the link is missing.
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2014
  2. ssullivan
    Original Member

    ssullivan Gold Member

    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    60,275
    Status Points:
    20,020
    Yes. The mobile app has not displayed upgrade lists for Q-400 flights since Republic took over that flying from Colgan. In the Colgan days it worked. I suspect it has something to do with the flight number range being used for those flights now being coded someplace as a range for flights that don't need the upgrade list. I do wish UA would fix it, as this has been a problem for going on 18 months now.
     
    snod08, Garp74 and TravelerRob like this.
  3. TravelerRob
    Original Member

    TravelerRob Silver Member

    Messages:
    645
    Likes Received:
    486
    Status Points:
    620
    Thanks.
    -Rob
     
  4. ssullivan
    Original Member

    ssullivan Gold Member

    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    60,275
    Status Points:
    20,020
    I have seen the list working on the full website for those flight, but not the app or mobile website.
     
  5. TravelerRob
    Original Member

    TravelerRob Silver Member

    Messages:
    645
    Likes Received:
    486
    Status Points:
    620
    Actually the list *does* appear on the iPhone mobile app. I just checked it out. So it's only missing from mobile.united.com.

    -Rob
     
  6. Mackieman
    Original Member

    Mackieman Gold Member

    Messages:
    11,320
    Likes Received:
    38,534
    Status Points:
    16,520
    I had an MCI-DEN flight this past weekend with this issue, but one in three Q400 segments showed an F cabin, but I wasn't on that one. At OLCI, I was placed on the upgrade standby list and cleared at the gate before boarding. So they should at least clear the upgrades like normal, just not via CPU.
     
  7. Max M

    Max M Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,639
    Likes Received:
    2,160
    Status Points:
    1,245
    The thought of First Class on a turboprop makes flying a turboprop more tolerable [slightly].
     
  8. KenInEscazu

    KenInEscazu Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    1,935
    Status Points:
    1,120
    I felt the same way until I actually flew in the F cabin of a Q400. It was a slightly wider version of miserable.
     
    TravelerRob likes this.
  9. Pizzaman
    Original Member

    Pizzaman Co-founder

    Messages:
    4,521
    Likes Received:
    8,762
    Status Points:
    7,270
    I don't know. As far as regional jets go, the Q400 doesn't bother me too much. Sure beats an ERJ 145 with no F.
     
  10. ssullivan
    Original Member

    ssullivan Gold Member

    Messages:
    27,358
    Likes Received:
    60,275
    Status Points:
    20,020
    I'd definitely take it over a CRJ-200. And some aspects of it I prefer to the CRJ-700. I can stand up in the aisle of the Q-400.
     
  11. Mackieman
    Original Member

    Mackieman Gold Member

    Messages:
    11,320
    Likes Received:
    38,534
    Status Points:
    16,520
    Agreed, the Q400 is better than a CR7, ERJ-145, and other than my upcoming trip to PEK, anything is better than a CR2.
     
    ssullivan likes this.
  12. KenInEscazu

    KenInEscazu Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    1,935
    Status Points:
    1,120
    I guess this thread shows why they make different flavors of ice cream. My gripe about the Q400 is about how loud and rickety they are. Other than the ability to stand up, I sure don't find the seating to be any more comfortable than any of the RJs mentioned here, but obviously our tastes vary.

    Personally, I'm just tired of anything UAX that isn't an E170. I did fly LAX-DFW in a C700 in F on Wednesday night, and I found the seats to be comfortable enough in which to sleep. Can't tell you how relieved I was when I boarded and saw that the new slimlines had not yet been installed on that A/C.

    Those new seats look great, but feel like Ruffles-shaped park benches to me. I strongly dislike them on RJs and mainline alike. If they leave the seats as-is in the Q400s, I may grow to like them along with the rest of you.
     
  13. Pizzaman
    Original Member

    Pizzaman Co-founder

    Messages:
    4,521
    Likes Received:
    8,762
    Status Points:
    7,270
    I wear noise canceling headphones for greater than 90% of my time in the air, so it don't internalize cabin noise issues. I feel the RJs are generally a lot darker inside and the height and width make me feel like I'm on a small plane. Other than the Q400 lav, I don't generally feel that way.
     
  14. TravelerRob
    Original Member

    TravelerRob Silver Member

    Messages:
    645
    Likes Received:
    486
    Status Points:
    620
    Q400s might be rickety (and they are) but the ERJ-145s are held together with duct tape. Literally. I hate flying the Barbie Jets more than any plane in the UA/UAX fleet. Luckily being SEA-based I never have to fly them unless I'm connecting to somewhere local out of IAH or IAD.

    -Rob
     
  15. KenInEscazu

    KenInEscazu Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,548
    Likes Received:
    1,935
    Status Points:
    1,120
    Let it be publicly noted that my dislike of the Q400 in no way represents an endorsement of the E135, E145, C200 or C700. I strongly dislike them all.

    IMHO, this fleet should be reduced to the number required to service only low population, rural markets with distances just out of reach or greater from mainline hubs or spokes. UA has made a significant miscalculation in thinking that we (their passengers, not just the MP/FT crowd) will be happier as a whole with greater frequency on these uncomfortable, unreliable and occasionally scary aircraft than we would be with fewer mainline flights evenly spaced throughout the day. Exceptions exist, but my money is on the scale being tipped in favor of my opinion.

    Nobody other than Premiers seeking credit or passengers connecting to/from international arrivals/departures would purchase a ticket on UA between DFW and IAH, DFW and LAX or DFW and SFO, just to name three horrendous examples, when non-stop mainline service option exists on many other airlines. Even when we do fall into one of those groups where the connection/flight credit is our best option, it does not endear us to the airline. Quite the contrary.

    The E170 is acceptable under the UAX banner, but would be better served if it were flown by UA. Jury is still out, of course, on the new E175. It's a wonderful plane, but will UAX service utilize its full potential?
     

Share This Page