Some Winter Flight Changes

Discussion in 'United Airlines | MileagePlus' started by blackjack-21, Jun 13, 2014.  |  Print Topic

  1. blackjack-21

    blackjack-21 Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    3,000
    Status Points:
    1,910
    Just noticed on FT (TOBB) that three of UA's TATL flights are getting cancelled for several months at a time in the late fall and into the new year. All are B757 flights and although some were seasonal, in the case of the BFS flight, it ran daily most of the year with it slowing to only five days a week in the fall and winter.

    Link is here: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-airlines-mileageplus/1584909-upcoming-tatl-winter-changes.html

    Coincidentally, we were speaking to a friend in Belfast yesterday, as she had just returned from a BFS-EWR-LAS trip, and all her flights on UA were fine, with the initial outbound B757 from BFS-EWR arriving into EWR 58 minutes early (I was watching her flight on a flight tracking website), and the flight almost completely full, as most of those flights usually are.

    Strangely too, when I went to the BFS airport website, they showed a small ceremony to mark CO/UA's ninth anniversary of the EWR-BFS flights, on May 29th. The lady we spoke to said while she was in LAS her son had seen on local Belfast television a report of UA cancelling their Newark flights to BFS, so I hope it's only this temporary stoppage announcement for a few of the slower winter months and not a complete and final cancellation.

    But with the current UA situation, one never knows. With it's large fleet of B752's, doesn't UA have enough aircraft for replacements if they need to send some in for D checks or another reason, so why cancel these usually very full flights (at least the BFS flight) for several months at a time?

    Hope it's only a short term plan, as we're watching that flight for a possible trip to the UK in the fall or next year.
     
    Garp74 and TAHKUCT like this.
  2. Counsellor
    Original Member

    Counsellor Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    1,620
    Status Points:
    1,120
    Just IMHO, but I think 757s should be banned from all TATL routes. It's almost like being back in a 707 :(.
     
  3. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,222
    Likes Received:
    61,771
    Status Points:
    20,020
    Why? Because it allows for more routes to be served non-stop?

    Worth noting that FCO is also being dropped for the winter and that's a 767 route, not a 757.
     
    blackjack-21 and ssullivan like this.
  4. Flyer1976
    Original Member

    Flyer1976 Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,247
    Likes Received:
    33,912
    Status Points:
    20,020
    They needed it for SCL. ;)
     
  5. Seacarl
    Original Member

    Seacarl Gold Member

    Messages:
    10,521
    Likes Received:
    11,372
    Status Points:
    16,520
    FCO is beyond the range of the 752. Maybe if it could be served by 752 it wouldn't be cancelled.

    Interesting it looks like they are cancelling both FCO routes (from IAD and from EWR). They could have but back to serving from just one gateway which could have preserved most flow traffic. I guess the plan is to connect via LH instead
     
  6. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,222
    Likes Received:
    61,771
    Status Points:
    20,020
    They did that last year. They still didn't have enough passengers.
    Yup. The JV was meant to manage and optimize this sort of thing.
     
  7. blackjack-21

    blackjack-21 Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    3,000
    Status Points:
    1,910
    Believe it or not, there are some of us who still like those old B757's. True they're single aisles and not those massive beasts, but they still do the job they're asked of, and in many cases still fit the route management by reducing the need for the larger B763/4 which may not always be filled on lighter routes and have a larger fuel burn for the same distances. And until something similar with the identical capabilities (B787's are not needed for the shorter TATL flights nor are there enough of them flying yet) and the similar sized B739's are not all ETOPS certified, so the -57's may be around for a bit.
    I've flown on B707's and lots before (DC4/6/7) and more well after those too, and the B757 is more powerful, takes off like a rocket, with vastly different interiors then the old models, although I'll agree that the airlines fitting more and more seats into the same spaces doesn't always make for a comfortable flight nowadays, but you can't blame the aircraft for that problem as the squeezed seating is in many of the newer models too, and not just on the other single aisle planes.

    So they may be getting long in the tooth, and are not always being upgraded in their interiors as they're being slowly phased out, but as long as they're flying and can keep a lighter used route cost effective for an airline, I'll happily step onto one of those birds until a better one comes along. Besides, with the smaller front cabin, usually more attentive service should be available from the crew, however there's no guarantee of that happening as we often see, but don't blame the plane for that shortcoming.

    Boeing could have easily re-engineered the B757 and put newer more fuel efficient engines on the bird, and my guess is they could've kept that type around for longer, as they've done with the B737's, but instead they've gone to the B739, which hasn't as yet proven itself to have the same capabilities.
     
    Counsellor likes this.
  8. Weatherboy

    Weatherboy Gold Member

    Messages:
    4,206
    Likes Received:
    7,456
    Status Points:
    5,245
    For crossings across the Atlantic, I prefer to have a window seat. So in C/J, whether you'e on a 757, a 777, or a 767, is there really much of a difference in crossing the ocean? I haven't noticed any. I wasn't a big fan of the 757's years ago when they had the old BusinessFirst product from Continental, but once they brought on the lie flats, other than # of available seats, I haven't noticed much in the way of service offering differences.

    Is it that people want middle-section access to the aisle of a twin-aisle plane?
     
    blackjack-21 likes this.
  9. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,222
    Likes Received:
    61,771
    Status Points:
    20,020
    All of UA's 737s are ETOPS IIRC, so that's not an issue. But the overall capabilities of the type are much more limited than the 757s.
     
    blackjack-21 likes this.
  10. Counsellor
    Original Member

    Counsellor Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    1,620
    Status Points:
    1,120
    Uh, no.

    It's more a matter of my comfort. I'm 6'4" and getting older. I don't bend in enough places to be comfortable in coach seats, particularly on long flights such as the TATLs. With a two-aisle plane, I can get up and walk around without being disruptive (or disrupted). And when I do put in for an upgrade, there are fewer seats to be upgraded to (and in the older planes, the upgraded seats really weren't International quality.

    As I said, it's almost like being back in a 707 (although a bit quieter, I'll grant).
    .
     
    blackjack-21 likes this.
  11. blackjack-21

    blackjack-21 Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    3,000
    Status Points:
    1,910
    Since this is in the UA forum, aren't all their PS transcons in the B757's or do they also use larger aircraft for those flights? So other then getting a larger aircraft for the coast to coast trips and hoping (or paying for, with either cash or miles) an upgrade on the bigger plane for your trips, the choice is limited if you want to go with PS service on your flight, such as it is.

    You've mentioned that you're around my age, so your height may no longer be as tall as you thought by now. Once we reach these more elevated age numbers, there seems to be some shrinkage in our skeletal package
    structure due to gravity and other factors, so your 6'4 may (didn't I see you on the basketball court in high school and college while I was running on the track team?) now be only 6'2 or thereabouts, as happened to me over the years, my previously taller 5' 7 and 15/16" soaking wet seems to have shortened over time to about 5' 7 and 11/16", so you should fit more easily into at least the PE seats if needed.

    I agree that walking around on a single aisle aircraft may be hazardous to your health, but it's still possible at different times, albeit with some twisting and turning to get by other pax and the crew, but that in itself may be good exercise too, and if you're flying anywhere on shorter flights nowadays there's less chance of a larger, twin aisled plane for your trip.

    Guess we all have our favorites for one reason or another. Mine are some of those that are either already gone or on their way out, for whatever reason. Lockheed Constellation and L-1011, VC-10, B747SP and other models, and all of the Boeing types over the years, including the B757, are and were mine.

    Now where did my wife hide my MS FlightSim98, so I can hook it up again on the pc and practice landing that B737-400 without all the bumps and bounces?
     
    Counsellor likes this.
  12. Wandering Aramean
    Original Member

    Wandering Aramean Gold Member

    Messages:
    28,222
    Likes Received:
    61,771
    Status Points:
    20,020
    I've never found myself to be disruptive on a single-aisle, either. Sure, I cannot run laps, but when I do that is typically when I'm disruptive. ;)
    The 752s had lie-flats across the board many years before the sUA fleet. As for upgrade inventory, mine have always cleared eventually on the 752s, though I have made some flight choices to help that. And they have E+ now should the upgrade not work out.
    Except the part where it really isn't.
     
    Counsellor likes this.
  13. Counsellor
    Original Member

    Counsellor Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    1,620
    Status Points:
    1,120
    They've been trying to wear me down all my life, blackjack, so I may no longer be as tall as I was; certainly I don't have as much hair on top as I did back when, nor as much "give" in the lumbar region (ruined discs may shorten height, but they exacerbate discomfort).

    I don't fly much coast-to-coast at all, so I've never done PS on United. What I do do is East Coast (DC area mainly) to Europe and back, or to Asia and back. "Old" United and their many flights from IAD to Europe was great, all wide-bodies, but now, from EWR, it seems most if not all of the flights use the 757. As I mentioned, the 757 and I don't seem to get along well on trans-Atlantic length flights.

    I did like the old 1011s. If I recall correctly, JAL used a lot of them in Asia
     
    blackjack-21 likes this.
  14. blackjack-21

    blackjack-21 Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    3,000
    Status Points:
    1,910
    UA seems to be gradually replacing many of their B757 flights from EWR to Europe (with the LHR flights being my current example) with the B767's and B777's so far.

    I first flew on the L-1011's when EA had them, and when Eastern went belly up, some of their L-1011's were bought by Air Transat (started as a charter carrier, now scheduled) in Canada, and they kept them in the air until just a few years ago. Air Canada also had some in their fleet for a while. Flew on both the -150 and -500 models of that plane, with trips to MIA, the UK, and LAS in past years. DL also had a large fleet of TriStars, and used them on a wide range of flights, includng the short ATL-FLL until they were replaced by.....B757's.
     
    Counsellor likes this.

Share This Page