United Airlines Places Orders for 100 787s + 100 Options, Orders 56 737MAX + 44 Exercised Options

[4WD]

The 787 is a wonderful jet. It sips fuel, flies fast, goes really, really far. Guys who fly it love it.

As fuel costs increase, and they will, airplanes like the 787 and the 737 Max give operators a big fuel cost advantage.

For comparison, the 787-8 has roughly the cabin size of a 767-300.

But it flies at 0.85 vs. 0.82 of the 763. It burns about 60% of the fuel. It has much greater range.

On long flights, that speed and fuel burn are a huge advantage. The range offers new possibilities and new markets.

When going to smaller markets, a medium size airplane that can offer direct service (e.g. SFO to Chengdu) is a huge time savings for customers who would otherwise have to connect in a major hub (e.g. Tokyo, or HKG in my above example).

And the game changing cabin pressure helps folks arrive fresh … Big plus on long rides like MEL to LAX …

 

[Astro14]

Will you move to evaluator on the 787, and if so what retaining is required for you?

We will have to see. I’m very happy where I am. I can hold the 787 but I would be on reserve (not a great lifestyle).

To be fully qualified as an evaluator on the airplane would require the full training course (6 weeks). IOE (initial flying, supervised by a check pilot). Three months of flying the airplane to get experience with it. Then six months of observing, and training, under supervision.

In all - close to a year before being a fully qualified evaluator.

I am interested, but as we are negotiating a contract, and the deliveries won’t start for a couple years, I’m not making any sudden moves.

 

[nthach]

By the time UAL receives the last of this initial 100 A/C order in 2032, their oldest 787-8s will be 20 years old.

I haven’t flown on a 787 yet - but it looks like UA will be my best bet to board one.

Why hasn’t United sprung for the 777X to replace the older 772s or the mission for those doesn’t exist there except for SFO/LAX/IAH to SYD/BNE/PVG?

 

[srfdude]

In 2 days my wife and I are taking an El Al flight, direct LAX-Tel Aviv. 787-9, first time on this bird. I understand the seats are quite narrow, so we are taking upgraded seating. 14 hrs. going, 15+ return. Long time for me to sit in one place. Haven't been able to find out whether they have wifi working, so filling up my phone with entertainment.
Any hints regarding this long flight?

 

[tbm5690]

In 2 days my wife and I are taking an El Al flight, direct LAX-Tel Aviv. 787-9, first time on this bird. I understand the seats are quite narrow, so we are taking upgraded seating. 14 hrs. going, 15+ return. Long time for me to sit in one place. Haven't been able to find out whether they have wifi working, so filling up my phone with entertainment.
Any hints regarding this long flight?

Walk around often.

 

[john_pifer]

In 2 days my wife and I are taking an El Al flight, direct LAX-Tel Aviv. 787-9, first time on this bird. I understand the seats are quite narrow, so we are taking upgraded seating. 14 hrs. going, 15+ return. Long time for me to sit in one place. Haven't been able to find out whether they have wifi working, so filling up my phone with entertainment.
Any hints regarding this long flight?

Take books.

 

[FowVay]

That flight over to Israel is killer. My airline doesn't fly non-stop so I usually go to Paris and spend a couple of days before heading over to TLV. It breaks the trip up and my old bones don't like sitting. Even in first class it's body and mind numbing.

As for entertainment... I'm old school and enjoy reading so I just take a book.

 

[Cujet]

The latest 787 with the GE engines can achieve 104 passenger MPG on Long Haul flights (over 4650 nautical miles) . For those who don't know, that is absolutely remarkable and I don't believe any other aircraft exceeds this number on such trips.

By way of comparison, trains can achieve superb pax MPG if densely packed (such as a commuter train with no luggage), but on long haul runs (generally over 500 miles) , the norm is about 70 pax MPG. Also of note, a train must generally travel 10-25% more distance than an airplane.

Amtrak is said to be 34% more efficient than domestic air travel at the cost of being more than 10X slower (29 hours, vs 2.4 hours FL to NY). I believe that number is not just inaccurate, it's shrinking.

 

[nthach]

That flight over to Israel is killer. My airline doesn't fly non-stop so I usually go to Paris and spend a couple of days before heading over to TLV. It breaks the trip up and my old bones don't like sitting. Even in first class it's body and mind numbing.

I believe Qantas will soon have some really long flights like JFK-SYD over the polar circle instead of flying to London or somewhere in Europe/Middle East to refuel. The A350 is enabling their Project Sunrise.

Singapore Airlines used to fly EWR-SIN the long way using an A340-500.

 

[wpod]

The latest 787 with the GE engines can achieve 104 passenger MPG on Long Haul flights (over 4650 nautical miles) . For those who don't know, that is absolutely remarkable and I don't believe any other aircraft exceeds this number on such trips.

By way of comparison, trains can achieve superb pax MPG if densely packed (such as a commuter train with no luggage), but on long haul runs (generally over 500 miles) , the norm is about 70 pax MPG. Also of note, a train must generally travel 10-25% more distance than an airplane.

Amtrak is said to be 34% more efficient than domestic air travel at the cost of being more than 10X slower (29 hours, vs 2.4 hours FL to NY). I believe that number is not just inaccurate, it's shrinking.

I would rather fly over taking a train . I like aircraft especially airliners for some strange reason.

 

[nthach]

I would rather fly over taking a train . I like aircraft especially airliners for some strange reason.

I’d rather fly or take the train than go on a road trip. A friend asked me why and I saw unless it’s a Mercedes S-Class or a BMW 7er, I can’t spend more than 4-5 hours in a car at a time.

 

[wpod]

I’d rather fly or take the train than go on a road trip. A friend asked me why and I saw unless it’s a Mercedes S-Class or a BMW 7er, I can’t spend more than 4-5 hours in a car at a time.

I will agree with the road trip thing. After about 4 hours the movement of the vehicle becomes painful. I can not exactly describe exactly why but the movement hurts my body and my mind.

 

[y_p_w]

I will agree with the road trip thing. After about 4 hours the movement of the vehicle becomes painful. I can not exactly describe exactly why but the movement hurts my body and my mind.

Road trips don't make much sense driving all the way though. I have to make pit stops along the way since the human body has needs. But 12 hours in an airline coach seat is pretty bad too. Amtrak is actually pretty good since there's room to move and there's encouragement to do it on long train rides. And even "coach" seats are huge and have a ton of legroom.