25th UAL 787 Scheduled for 11/20/2015.
12-06-2014, 10:55 PM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 239
I can dig into CCS for a screen snapshot if you really doubt it. WX was low in SFO and 100+ headwinds from Iowa west. Even on a normal day you're lucky to do EWR-SFO and arrive with more than about 7.5k in my experience. Add another hour for winds, plus divert, etc.... We were never going to come close. Not bashing the Guppy, it is what it is. I'm sure the other 99% of the time it makes more money than an older 757.
At some inflection point, it will happen enough that a reputation will be forged for this nonsense. There have been already a plethora of reasons that high revenue passengers have left UA in DROVES since the merger. This only adds to the negative reputation bandwagon.
Near sighted idiocy.
12-07-2014, 05:40 AM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
WX was low in SFO and 100+ headwinds from Iowa west. Even on a normal day you're lucky to do EWR-SFO and arrive with more than about 7.5k in my experience. Add another hour for winds, plus divert, etc.... We were never going to come close. Not bashing the Guppy, it is what it is. I'm sure the other 99% of the time it makes more money than an older 757.
12-07-2014, 05:50 AM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Gets weekends off
Posts: 1,168
Grumble, I've got 14 years flying the 73 out of EWR and have been flying the ER since its introduction. I've never had a fuel stop to the West Coast. The reality is I've probably been lucky and you've probably been unlucky, but I believe given the market, it's the best plane for the mission right now.
It doesn't make sense to fly an airplane that 100% of the time costs 20% more, but only 20% of the time makes 10% more revenue.
Those numbers don't add up.
12-07-2014, 06:47 AM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,244
Grumble, I've got 14 years flying the 73 out of EWR and have been flying the ER since its introduction. I've never had a fuel stop to the West Coast. The reality is I've probably been lucky and you've probably been unlucky, but I believe given the market, it's the best plane for the mission right now. If we had our way, we'd be flying 744s EWR to MHT and in Chapter 11. Thankfully, they buy 'em, we fly'em.
12-07-2014, 07:11 AM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 455
Yeah, the math doesn't really add up with that one. Maybe it was 2 every other month.
12-07-2014, 07:12 AM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 455
12-07-2014, 07:29 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Yeah, it's a misnomer. The only thing I can think of to justify it is its "Extended Range" for a -900. When we got the old (non-"ER") -900s they were pretty much IAH and FL birds. Same capacity tanks and MGTOW as the -800, but more room. Everything was a payload vs. fuel problem. The "ERs" have the same tanks, but a much higher MGTOW, so you can carry payload and fuel, but not as much as we'd like because it now burns more. At least that's my guess as to how they get away with calling it "ER."
12-07-2014, 07:30 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
12-07-2014, 09:28 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Position: 73 CA EWR
Posts: 514
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
