How long until United drop one of their Australian flights?

[Gerald A]

I am not technically mineded when it comes to working out a flight route by Speed and ETOPS Time Setting, so maybe someone can put me straight, could this be done

I cant understand why United have never extended one of there HNL B772 flights to SYD. I worked out that a B772 could have the range to do the flight 4403nm with 832nm in reserve.

LAX - SYD B772ER range 6507nm with 1193nm in reserve. can it be done. If it can, why use B744s.

Links for working it out
Boeing B772 http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777...00product.html
Great Circle Mapper http://gc.kls2.com/

[Andrew McLaughlin]

Originally Posted by Gerald A

I cant understand why United have never extended one of there HNL B772 flights to SYD...

Probably because they'd be flying empty between HNL and SYD. Everyone on their flights to HNL want to go to HNL. There would be few pax wanting to fly HNL-SYD, and those that do are already catered for by Hawaiian and Qantas.

I interviewed UA's local CEO, Alison Espley a couple of months ago (July issue), and she said the airline is holding its own on the Pacific and there are no plans to change services or equipment.

[NickN]

I interviewed UA's local CEO, Alison Espley a couple of months ago (July issue), and she said the airline is holding its own on the Pacific and there are no plans to change services or equipment.

If that's the case it'd be good to know who isn't holding their own. If V Australia is increasing their load factor and Delta is confident enough to step in then does that mean Qantas is suffering the most by default or are passenger numbers improving enough on the route that they are all making it by.

[Rhys Xanthis]

Originally Posted by NickN

Qantas is suffering the most

I think the old saying "If you've got more to start with, you've just got more to lose" applies here.

However, saying that, QF would be in an ok position if a price war started...in a far better position than VA at least (I feel bad for VA, but at the same time I don't want to see QF go down too much on the pacific either....)

[Andrew McLaughlin]

V Australia only has a few flights a week so far and Delta is five times per week, so neither would be eating into UA or QF's markets too much. Plus, the market is not a finite size - the new competition and the GFC has meant lower airfares which in turn means new markets have been opened up to passengers who may not previously have been able to afford to fly.

A personal experience I can relate - I went to the US in early July on a work trip, and arranged for my family to join me in LA at the end of that trip for 10 days in the US. For four of them, it cost me about $4500 return on Delta (and would've been cheaper on VA had I been quick enough), about half the usual fare. There's no way we could have afforded to do it if there weren't heavy discounts on the route.

[Adam G]

Originally Posted by Andrew McLaughlin

V Australia only has a few flights a week so far and Delta is five times per week

V is daily from SYD

[Gerald A]

Andrew, Delta is daily.

[Andrew M]

Delta is actually 6 times a week between Sep 6 and Dec 6 due to "maintenance"

I have lost count how many times UA have come out and said they are willing to accept losses, we have good feeds, the route is their investment etc, we are not leaving the route...

Drop a flight? Mabye not. I think more along the lines of "temporary suspending" some flights, like this coming Feb, aka Dead season.

[D Chan]

Originally Posted by NickN

I don't have any knowledge of what UA's Premium Economy product is like but hey is you get a little more legroom for that price then so be it.

exactly same as standard economy, the ONLY difference is the extra seatpitch ..

as for who's hurting, all airlines in the market are hurting. But the real losers out of the dramatic fall in ticket prices (and yield) are airlines that offer one-stop services to the US. With fares so cheap there is now very little incentive for travellers to do a one-stop unless they want to visit an extra destination with a stopover etc. Essentially the numbers I think would have dropped quite significantly.

UA will hang on for a number of reasons: 1) due to the amount of feeds they have, 2) mileage plus / frequent flyer program. Don't underestimate their network in the US which gives pax a lot of options and destinations - it also gives pax the option to fly with just one carrier all the way through from SYD or MEL to a point in the US. From memory around 60-70% of pax are americans or greencard holders. Pax might not necessarily enjoy the service but it is probably the most direct and easiest way home for some americans.
I am telling you it is easier for UA to fill a seat than VAustralia which I suspect would find the volume of feed traffic from other points in US a problem.

quite a large number of UA pax don't stop at LAX, meaning they are not just O-D traffic. They connect to other points in the states.

I think the inherent problem with UA operating the 777 to Australia is that it just won't compete payloadwise or as an equipment with Delta's 777-200LR. If they were to downgrade from a 744 then this begs the question whether the aircraft is capable of delivering the goods in comparison with Delta. I think UA, QF and DL can weather the storm. Remains to be seen how VA will last in the long term. I personally don't think VA will survive if they only focus on the US market, they have to fly somewhere else and explore options to ride through the storm which is why they are tossing up the ideas of BNE-HKG etc.