United Airlines to replace B747-400's with B777-200's to Australia from 1/4/14

[Stefan Perkas]

Afternoon all,

Sad news today, with United Airlines set to replace the B747-400's with B777-200ER's on its Australia flights. Final B747-400 arrival/departure flights in Australia will be on 31/3/14

Los Angeles – Sydney – Melbourne eff 30MAR14 UA 3-class Boeing 777-200ER replaces 747-400
UA839 LAX2145 – 0710+2SYD0900+2 – 1045+2MEL 777 D
UA840 MEL1220 – 1345SYD1450 – 1030LAX 777 D

UA840 operates with Boeing 777 from 01APR14. This marks the end of UA Boeing 747 operation at Los Angeles.

San Francisco – Sydney eff 30MAR14 UA 3-class Boeing 777-200ER replaces 747-400
UA863 SFO2210 – 0625+2SYD 777 D
UA870 SYD1445 – 1120SFO 777 D

UA870 operates with Boeing 777 from 01APR14

Info from: http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/17/ua-s14update1/

[Nigel C]

Does that mean an upgrade to the in-flight entertainment options?

[Julian L]

So another 747 operator gone from the Sydney skies.

Will that just leave Qantas and Thai as the only Passenger 747 operators into Sydney?

[Joe Frampton]

And I was just looking at United's new 8 across sardine business configuration on their refitted 777's... 8 across - seriously? WTF?

Jamming 8 across in business class with people facing each other just isn't the thing... I hope this doesn't start some stupid trend among airlines, I mean they can shove more seats in economy, but 8 across in business? They just have zero respect for their business class pax doing this.

They have a website flogging the new config ...
https://hub.united.com/en-us/news/products-services/Pages/flat-beds-on-united-long-haul-flights.aspx
and the nasty comments were previously quite visible, but it looks like they have taken them down or covered them up now. :D

[Kelvin R]

BA have 8 across in business and this works OK.

Really though you are flying UA because it is cheap, not because it has the best trans-pac business. If you are wanting cheap then often DL offer a better fare, product, and Velocity points and status credits. If you are looking for best product this would be QF or VA depending on personal preference.

[Jarden S]

That is a big reduction in seats from a 374 seat 747 to a 267 seat 3 class 777-200ER.
Its a shame they not ordered the larger -300ER as would be a better 747 replacement.
UA 747 operations will move to Chicargo.

[Radi K]

Does the 777-200ER have the range to operate LAX & SFO direct to SYD with no significant payload restrictions?

I thought it did? Unless they are capping the flight?

[JamesL]

I'm under the impression there is, but we will have to wait and see...

[Joe Frampton]

That is a big reduction in seats from a 374 seat 747 to a 267 seat 3 class 777-200ER.
Its a shame they not ordered the larger -300ER as would be a better 747 replacement.
UA 747 operations will move to Chicargo.

Yes that's a massive reduction in capacity really... about 1400 seats a week each way from their current capacity!

Every time I have been trans-pacific on UA they seem to be pretty much bursting at the seams, so I don't think this is something they will advertise

[Jacob L]

Great,

SYD will start to become a 777 mega

DL,BA,EY (Sometimes),VA,SQ, and now UA

So sad to see the 747 start to diminish from Australian skies:(

[Ash W]

And I was just looking at United's new 8 across sardine business configuration on their refitted 777's... 8 across - seriously? WTF?

Jamming 8 across in business class with people facing each other just isn't the thing... I hope this doesn't start some stupid trend among airlines, I mean they can shove more seats in economy, but 8 across in business? They just have zero respect for their business class pax doing this.


How is the new business class different to what is on the 747 today in particular in relation to facing each other? I mean to say on the 747 the seats face each other, but of course have the barrier in the middle where the TV's are located so it's not like you are looking at them or sharing space. Flew them last year LAX-SYD and had no issue in this regards.

[Michael Cleary]

BA have 8 across in business and this works OK.

Really though you are flying UA because it is cheap, not because it has the best trans-pac business. If you are wanting cheap then often DL offer a better fare, product, and Velocity points and status credits. If you are looking for best product this would be QF or VA depending on personal preference.

The BA 8 across - at least as I have seen in their 744,s is offset, and one facing forward, one facing back.

UA on the other hand are simply 2-4-2. Shoulder room on par with PE in Qantas.

[Kelvin R]

I can very easily sleep on my side on the UA seats, so haven't found a shoulder room issue. The footwell is a little tight but that's about it. On par with BA in terms of space and better that QF as you don't have the seat shell around you.

[Trevor O]

:p Better than Qantas! Hysterical!!!

[Ash W]

The discussion is about the seat not the package. Package wise Qantas wins hands down, seat wise I agree with both the comments above.

The UA width is on par with Qantas PE (which is pretty generous and a great product) and that the space on the UA seat feels better as there is no shell enclosing you which can make the Qantas seat claustrophobic.

[Kieran Wells]

Sorry to bring this back up.
United have now announced they will be de-linking SYD-MEL and will do LAX-MEL directly with new B789's effective 26/Oct. B772 service to sydney from SFO/LAX will remain.

http://airchive.com/blog/2014/02/19/uniteds-first-787-9-route-announcement/

[Ryan K]

Don't be sorry, this is pretty big news. So, there will now be three carriers operating MEL-LAX non-stop. Will the A380 be too big for QF to operate with this extra competition? Perhaps switch it back to a 744ER and re-direct the A380 MEL-SIN-LHR... Although, I'm not sure if there are the spare aircraft to do this and if the Emirates deal allows Europe traffic through Asia.

[Stuart Trevena]

Hi All,

So why don't United still ops the SFO flight down to Mel?

This would give the US Passengers a chance to visit Melb, but also give us Melbourne passengers, a chance to fly to SFO.

We will now have to fly domestic in to Sydney before transferring and going through Customs.

Stuart

[Justin L]

Or MEL passengers could fly to LAX and transfer to a domestic UA connection to SFO from there, or vice versa.

[Stephen Brown]

Though LAX is an absolute ****hole to get through. Best to go into the US some other way.

[Ben W]

This is actually really good news. United will go from having the worst product offering across the pacific to now having possibly the best....or at least on a par with the best. The LAX-MEL flight will also bring fares way lower for QA & VA on that route.

Good news all around for the consumer!

[Ash W]

Sydney isn't much better, though of course flying MEL-SYD-SFO on United one wouldn't have to change terminals or go through immigration in Sydney so that is a bonus.

[Ryan K]

Well, actually they would have to change terminals. UA are cancelling the SYD-MEL-SYD leg of their Australian services when the direct MEL-LAX flights begin.

[Ash W]

Ryan whilst you are correct they are dropping that leg, if you care to follow the conversation back for a few more posts (start reading at post 18) rather than replying to a reply in isolation you would see that somone asked why United doesn't keep SYD-MEL for SFO traffic. The conversation has flowed from there.

[NathanJ]

Amazing news. Out with the old, in with the future!

[Daniel M]

Quite a nice pick across the Pacific for Australians and American's alike - 777, A380 and 787 !

[Brian Hoy]

[Though LAX is an absolute ****hole to get through. Best to go into the US some other way]

Going though TBIT is a pain but like Delta, United use their own terminal "Terminal seven" for United and should make for a much better transit. I usualy only take about 25 to 30 mins to clear a Delta,s Terminal 5.

[James S.]

Really going to miss their 747's super heavy, smokey departures from Sydney. Spotting here gets even more boring. :(

[Brian Wilkes]

You guys in Sydney dont know how lucky you are with the different variations you get there with the regular services, charters, biz jets and military movements, and you still complain!

[James S.]

You guys in Sydney dont know how lucky you are with the different variations you get there with the regular services, charters, biz jets and military movements, and you still complain!

I specifically look for more exotic aircraft (Such as the Tu-204 recently which was great) or the classic aircraft. Don't give two hoots about new 787 or A330 service variations. But maybe that appeals to some. With the future loss of the A340-600's of Virgin and Etihad, United's 747's, Qantas having already retired their 767RR's and 734's, Aerolineas Argentinas ceasing services, Korean perhaps not sending their 747-400 after this summer, and Thai perhaps switching to 77W's soon from 744s, to me, that signals a change to more boring aircraft. Sorry, but that's just what I enjoy seeing as a spotter.

[Joe Frampton]

Funny, in this thread and so many others, people rave on about how bad LAX is. Living over here, we are travelling through LAX all the time, and everything has been great. Flew into TBIT on VA a few weeks back, and we were out on the pavement in about 20 mins. I think LAX takes a bad rap for no reason. Yes, they've had their fair share of problems, the terminals are basic at best in terms of shops/restaurants, and god forbid if your flight arrives early, your gate will probably still be occupied, but LAX does actually work. And I would honestly say in terms of customs processing they are no worse than SYD in a peak period. And the airport is constantly under improvement. LAX is ok, it does the job, but if you can fly around it, then go for it.

[Jayden Laing]

I specifically look for more exotic aircraft (Such as the Tu-204 recently which was great) or the classic aircraft. Don't give two hoots about new 787 or A330 service variations. But maybe that appeals to some. With the future loss of the A340-600's of Virgin and Etihad, United's 747's, Qantas having already retired their 767RR's and 734's, Aerolineas Argentinas ceasing services, Korean perhaps not sending their 747-400 after this summer, and Thai perhaps switching to 77W's soon from 744s, to me, that signals a change to more boring aircraft. Sorry, but that's just what I enjoy seeing as a spotter.

Times are changing James! Out with 4 engines & in with 2 engines.... It's the way the airline world is heading now especially when it all comes back to fuel savings & profit!

[James S.]

Thanks Jayden, I'm well aware of that. My point still stands that it's getting more boring with a lack of aircraft variety, and all the new aircraft sound like Prius'. They don't have character like they used to....

[Daniel M]

Funny, in this thread and so many others, people rave on about how bad LAX is. Living over here, we are travelling through LAX all the time, and everything has been great. Flew into TBIT on VA a few weeks back, and we were out on the pavement in about 20 mins. I think LAX takes a bad rap for no reason. Yes, they've had their fair share of problems, the terminals are basic at best in terms of shops/restaurants, and god forbid if your flight arrives early, your gate will probably still be occupied, but LAX does actually work. And I would honestly say in terms of customs processing they are no worse than SYD in a peak period. And the airport is constantly under improvement. LAX is ok, it does the job, but if you can fly around it, then go for it.

Agreed. Although dated and like you mentioned, simple, it serves its purpose very well. Arriving landside is hassle free, and driving in to pick up people, I spend less time dealing with traffic etc around the terminal roads than I do at most major Australian airports. Everything flows very well. Check in and security is also very basically laid out but works well. I never have a hassle when travelling through LAX and actually enjoy it most times.

I think in general US people are more accustomed to airline travel as a whole, which helps to speed up things like TSA checks. Everyone in the states knows what to do, they have all their documents out ready to go and there are rarely any hold ups. You get to somewhere like Melbourne or Sydney, people haven't got a clue what they've done with their boarding passes, deodarant cans with no lids through security scanners, "please remove everything from you pockets" results in people still going through metal detectors 4 times as they remove 1 more thing every time etc etc. Flying in Australia makes my brain melt.

[Nigel C]

Does anyone know when United started flying B747's (of any variant) into Sydney?

[Jason H]

Looks like UA839 for 29/03 is a 772 due in Monday morning, as is UA863, and has been a 772 for the last 2 days. I'm guessing today's UA870 was the last UA744. Started a few days early it seems?

[Grahame Hutchison]

Nigel, from what I can find, United began services to Sydney during the first quarter of 1986, with various models of the B747.

The United Airlines UA811 B747 cargo door failure was on Friday, February 24, 1989 (9 fatalities, 38 injured).

[Nigel C]

Thanks Grahame, much appreciated.

[Grahame Hutchison]

From the second year of United B747 operations into Sydney - look how small the United logo was.

United B747-122 N4719U (19880) in December 1987 - N4713U was the aircraft involved in the cargo door failure.
http://www.16right.com/MessageBoard/YSSYOldImages2/United%20B747-200%20N4719U%2019871205.jpg

[Michael Cleary]

Nigel, from what I can find, United began services to Sydney during the first quarter of 1986, with various models of the B747.

The United Airlines UA811 B747 cargo door failure was on Friday, February 24, 1989 (9 fatalities, 38 injured).

Including the 747-SP, which they inherited from Pan-Am along with the Pacific Routes. From memory, the earliest flights were operated by Pan-Am liveried Aircraft too.

But until now, all have been 747 variants.

[MarkR]

Nigel, from what I can find, United began services to Sydney during the first quarter of 1986, with various models of the B747.

The United Airlines UA811 B747 cargo door failure was on Friday, February 24, 1989 (9 fatalities, 38 injured).

UA bought the Pan Am Pacific ops in April 85, first actual UA service was June 2 1986 ex Sydney. I remember when they flew the first 744 into Sydney as a commercial service, I was working in the tower that morning. They were the launch customer for the variant.

[James S.]

They were the launch customer for the variant.

Incorrect, Northwest was.

[MarkR]

Incorrect, Northwest was.

I stand corrected, they were certainly the first operator into Aus with one, which is perhaps what I was confused with.

[Stefan Perkas]

Afternoon all,

United Airlines changes to Sydney from 26/10/14....

Los Angeles – Sydney eff 26OCT14 Operational schedule changes from SYD (eff 28OCT14), service moves from 1500hrs to 1100hrs, which sees early arrival in LAX

UA839 LAX2230 – 0840+2SYD 777 D
UA840 SYD1130 – 0620LAX 777 D

San Francisco – Sydney eff 26OCT14 Operational schedule changes from SYD (eff 28OCT14), service moves from 1600hrs to 1400hrs, which sees mid-morning arrival in SFO

UA863 SFO2230 – 0835+2SYD 777 D
UA870 SYD1430 – 0915SFO 777 D

Info from: http://airlineroute.net/2014/06/14/ua-w14update1/

[Jason Le]

UA863 and UA2070 arriving tomorrow morning from SFO.

Anyone know why there is an additional service?

[Stefan Perkas]

UA863 and UA2070 arriving tomorrow morning from SFO.

Anyone know why there is an additional service?

Appears as though 'UA870' has been cancelled for today.

[Andrew Coggan]

Today marked the end of United's SYD-MEL-SYD tag on service with 787-9 N38950 to operate the inaugural UA98 LAX-MEL direct arriving tomorrow morning.

[NathanJ]

Great to see one last mega triple launch this morning!

[Todd Steele]

Damn!!! I say this because I live under the flight path over the melbourne-sydney leg, love seeing the Uniteds over the years fly over my house, from battleship grey through to the CO livery today, I wanted to catch it :( oh well, here is to spotting the MEL-LAX flight at its crushing altitude, I manage to catch QFs service so UA shouldn't be any different.

[Stefan Perkas]

Today marked the end of United's SYD-MEL-SYD tag on service with 787-9 N38950 to operate the inaugural UA98 LAX-MEL direct arriving tomorrow morning.

The 1st B787-8 is scheduled for Wednesday when N28912 (http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N28912) is scheduled to operate UA98/99.

[Ryan N]

http://www.traveller.com.au/united-airlines-launches-worlds-longest-boeing-787-dreamliner-route-with-melbourne-to-los-angeles-flights-11ctfr

[Brian Wilkes]

On what days are the 787-8 due into Melbourne?
One on Wednesday's and the other on Sat or Sun? for a limited time.

[Shaal L]

according to united site first 3 suns in nov and 1st 2 tues/fri are 787-8

[Brian Wilkes]

Thanks!

[Stefan Perkas]

On what days are the 787-8 due into Melbourne?
One on Wednesday's and the other on Sat or Sun? for a limited time.

B787-8 N28912 is operating tomorrow's flight, and is scheduled to operate Friday 31/10's flight.

[Brian Wilkes]

Ta Stefan!

[Rowan McKeever]

Someone posted this link in a group on facebook so I'm sharing here. UA to switch both SYD flights from B772 to B789 by (Northern) Summer 2016.

https://twitter.com/airlineroute/status/636638835116367872

[Alex T]

Here's an additional AusBT article in regard to the changes:
http://www.ausbt.com.au/united-to-fly-boeing-787-to-sydney-drop-first-class-to-australia?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=flipper&utm_campaign=home-flipper