Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
LAX -400 Rumors of Changes >

LAX -400 Rumors of Changes

Search

Notices

LAX -400 Rumors of Changes

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-17-2013, 03:37 AM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 168
Default

In 2011 I was on a four hour sit and was sifting around the company website and hit the webpage that lists the top Officers of United Airlines. Out of 27 only 7 were former United. So I'm unsure who the "they" is you refer to but it's not former United management. Not that they were any good, or old Continental was bad.
Birddog is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 06:17 AM
  #32  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Airhoss's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
Default

Originally Posted by Birddog
In 2011 I was on a four hour sit and was sifting around the company website and hit the webpage that lists the top Officers of United Airlines. Out of 27 only 7 were former United. So I'm unsure who the "they" is you refer to but it's not former United management. Not that they were any good, or old Continental was bad.
Good now the new "they" can make the same mistakes as the old "they". And a whole batch of new ones like 757-200's trans Atlantic and the little 777 LAX SYD. It really isn't rocket science.
Airhoss is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 08:07 AM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: A320/A319/B737 Sys Acft Maint Controller
Posts: 303
Default -400 to Syd

Originally Posted by cadetdrivr
What?!?!? You are seriously suggesting flying nonstop with full pax and full cargo at the same time and with a smaller per-seat fuel burn?

That's crazy talk to the folks inside Willis Tower.

(You know, the ones that took the 400 out of ORD and thought a 757 was a fine aircraft for CDG-IAD.)
Many of those doing the planning for the -400 at ORD don't have the foggiest notion of what's happening. For One? The Hangar and Ramp area at ORD are about to become a NEW Runway!! so the facilities to maintain the -400 will be impaired severely and ORD might become not much more than a Very large terminal operation as the new facilities have not yet started going up on the south side of ORD. Much of the expertise AND MOST OF THE resources to maintain the -400 are on the west coast and aren't coming back east anytime soon.
I can't speak to the Pilot base as I don't know but there's a LOT of consternation at Willis because some would like to retire the -400 and some would like to keep it, as of NOW? The A350-1000 will be 4 years out with no real guarantee that it will meet the present mission OF the -400. And there are NO alternatives immediately to be had on the marketplace.. to be short? We're in a Pickle!! what are the Alternatives?? the 747-8i, the A380-800 or the 777-300ER/LR of which NONE can be had in the short term. So I guess we fly the 777's we already have?? or we mix the 777 and 747 missions.
strfyr51 is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 09:35 AM
  #34  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: 73 CA EWR
Posts: 514
Default

Originally Posted by Carolsdanger
Yes the old CAL management in charge of the New United Airlines knows exactly how to run International Operations??? Will the house of cards fail before we get real airline people in place to fix it and succeed?

I don't care if you're UAL or CAL start saving a little for hard times ahead.
Yes once again CAL management has to clean up a UAL mess.
Blockoutblockin is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 09:54 AM
  #35  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
Default

Well I started this thread with no real knowledge of the closing of LAX and essentially moving it to ORD, but it seemed logical.

The truth is UAL -400 are nearing the end of their useful life and UAL mgmt gambled on not needing a replacement airplane for another 4+ years. So here they are moving metal around to fill the holes.

Oh and for some reason no one seems to remember sCAL mgmt had planned on using the 787 from IAH - AKL, but lo and behold Boeing over promised and under delivered with the more capable next gen version of the 787 years away. What a pickle UAL has grown into.

I'm sure people are happier flying "guppies" to DSM and OMA anyway. ;(
Regularguy is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 09:58 AM
  #36  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cadetdrivr's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Default

Originally Posted by Blockoutblockin
Yes once again CAL management has to clean up a UAL mess.
Weird.

For example, the 747-400 didn't have the extreme "reliability" problem in ORD until after the new post-merger management team found an ingenious way to save $$$ by not duplicating the stocked spare parts in ORD with the ones in SFO.

Just imagine the savings!

(The problem was any pre-depatrure MX delay in ORD could cause the FAs to go illegal without sufficient international FA RSVs to cover an entire crew---which is itself yet another example of the imaginary savings providing by tight staffing.)

Last edited by cadetdrivr; 08-17-2013 at 10:11 AM.
cadetdrivr is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 10:49 AM
  #37  
Gets Weekends Off
 
oldmako's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: The GF of FUPM
Posts: 3,073
Unhappy

Originally Posted by cadetdrivr
Weird.

For example, the 747-400 didn't have the extreme "reliability" problem in ORD until after the new post-merger management team found an ingenious way to save $$$ by not duplicating the stocked spare parts in ORD with the ones in SFO.

Just imagine the savings!

(The problem was any pre-depatrure MX delay in ORD could cause the FAs to go illegal without sufficient international FA RSVs to cover an entire crew---which is itself yet another example of the imaginary savings providing by tight staffing.)

Bingo! This bears repeating. Unfortunately, many are too obtuse to grasp the not so obvious. We watch the pennies while the twenties go down the toilet!

Other than the idiotic idea to close the ORD 400 base, Cal's Mgmt of UAL has been fantastic! One need look no further than the Shares debacle, the gutting of first and business class service and the loss of a huge chunk of premium pax to DAL.

I used to have high hopes for this merger given the mass of the combined companies and the resulting route network. But the last two years have done zero to inspire my confidence. We used to work for much better companies than we do now.
oldmako is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 11:26 AM
  #38  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: 73 CA EWR
Posts: 514
Default

Originally Posted by Carolsdanger
UAL international operations was a well oiled machine.
Yes, so well oiled you slid right into bankruptcy. The only thing more slippery are your rationalizations.
Blockoutblockin is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 01:09 PM
  #39  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: 777
Posts: 2,173
Default

I disagree, the 747-8 can be had on relatively short notice. It hasn't been selling well, and there is only a very small backlog. If UAL were to order the -8, I think we'd have planes before TK could spool up training and get a sim.

In general, the 400's have too much life left, (Not ours) and it is an expensive plane for a small increace in productivity/efficiency. Worth the investment? My opinion, yes. CO managers have something against the 747. I have no idea what. The Airbus A350 is a huge gamble, and with the stretched out/delayed deliveries, might not work for our timelines. Again, the -8's would.

777-300ER while a fantastic plane, can't haul the cargo, and deliveries are too far out with a big backlog. I do have a friend that sells new Boeing planes at Boeing, if Jeff wants, I can do the introductions.
Dave Fitzgerald is offline  
Old 08-17-2013, 01:10 PM
  #40  
Gets Weekends Off
 
gofastmopar's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2012
Position: B756 Capt Junior Lineholder
Posts: 136
Default

Originally Posted by Carolsdanger
UAL international operations was a well oiled machine. But hey, the new United managements wisdom is to put the "smallest equipment" that can complete the operation with JUST ONE fuel stop.

Meantime we send our PREMIUM INTERNATIONAL PASSENGERS running to Delta and American. Remember the 757 fiasco with flights over the North Atlantic? We sent premium passengers to other carriers to avoid the fuel stop to make connections. Guess who those guys book travel on now - not United.

You can defend them all you want but START SAVING. It can't last very long until it breaks.
Your doom and gloom is getting old. The LCAL 752's are true 9hr airframes and do very well in serving their European cities that cannot support a bigger 767.
The times they have to make a fuel stop are few and far between. I did these runs for 12 years and I'm not making this up.
gofastmopar is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SpreadEagle
SkyWest
20
04-13-2013 09:12 AM
grant123
Cargo
9
01-30-2011 10:20 AM
Cooperd0g
Major
30
09-02-2008 10:35 PM
dvhighdrive88
Major
6
04-04-2008 12:49 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices