United Airlines Modifying 787-9s For New Longest Route

United's long haul strategy is incredibly unique and interesting. The 787 has really been a game-changer, with United taking full advantage of it.

I'd say that Newark and San Francisco have really been the two biggest beneficiaries recently, plus Tel Aviv.
-United has added Tel Aviv service from 3 additional cities (Chicago, San Fran, DC) and increased capacity from EWR.
-New Flight to Naples
-second daily flight to Tokyo from newark
-increased capacity to Athens, Rome, BCN and Dublin on the 787-10
-2nd daily Frankfurt flight from Newark
-Singapore flight from SFO
-Chendu flight from SFO
-Amsterdam from SFO
-New Dehli from SFO

need i say more....

well done United

Those traffic numbers are pre-COVID though, no? There is a possibility that the percentage of SF traffic reduces. We’ve already seen many of the tech companies allow employees to work remotely. They may choose to move to locations that aren’t hubs, which then can even out the routings. It’ll still be significant, I’m sure, but maybe less so.

American probably secured some sort of corporate contract for Seattle to Bangalore.

For U.S. to Bangalore origin traffic, LAX accounts for 4.9% and DFW accounts for 6.3%. Pairing these along with Seattle, that's 15.5% of total traffic. Like you mentioned, the route will need connecting traffic which can come from other areas with substantial demand to Bangalore, such as Atlanta, Chicago, and of course San Francisco - possibly from people loyal to AA/AS.

@Andrew B
Your point makes sense but I don't think it will move the needle on corporate traffic because the tech people who might choose to relocate out of SF will largely be the senior engineers who work relatively independently whereas the people traveling to Bangalore were largely managers who might have a harder time relocating out of the city.

Does American really expect people to fly from the east such as Atlanta, Miami, or Dallas, backtrack to Seattle and then fly to Bangalore...

Why not just fly Lufthansa or British airways and not have as long of a journey through Seattle?

I can see San Jose, San Franciso, or LAX through Seattle, but not much else, maybe besides Denver or Phoneix

American should reconsider and launch jfk blr...as jfk is american airlines hub and Bangalore has a pretty good load to jfk at around 70k per year(pre covid)

Interesting but counter-intuitive that SFO-MEL is a shorter flight than LAX-MEL.

@Mike C, not if you look at California on a globe!

LA is further East than Reno, NV!

They need to add prem plus on these since my company wont pay for biz but will pay for prem econ. Sfo to blr I still rather go through LH or SQ in prem Econ with a stop to Bangalore.

A little off topic but speaking of new Polaris seating, has United done anything to accelerate the retrofits of their long haul aircraft during the flying hiatus that is the COVID-19 pandemic? Anyone have any progress to report?

@ The Original Donna -- Quite to the contrary, they've slowed down reconfiguring planes in order to save cash.

@ mike -- The planes with new Polaris seats should also have Premium Plus, as far as I know. 🙂

@ Ishrion -- Between Dallas and Los Angeles we're talking about an extra 100 people per day, so between those two cities and Seattle, that's 150 passengers per day. A few more things to keep in mind:
-- From Atlanta and Chicago it's significant backtracking to go via Seattle, vs. flying via Europe (and that's not even accounting for an all around better product if you're flying internationally the whole way)
-- From Dallas it's more or less breakeven (distance-wise) flying via Seattle vs. London
-- No airline is ever going to capture 100% of traffic in a local market, given that airlines often charge a premium for nonstop flights, so many would rather connect and save money, fly a better airline, etc.

Ultimately this route relies on connectivity from the entire west coast, with San Francisco basically being as big as other west coast markets combined. With United adding Bangalore as well, I just don't see where the passengers for American's flight would come from.

Now, with American's new partnership at JetBlue I could see a New York to Bangalore flight, which seems much more logical at this point (though I'm not sure if that's pushing the limit on American's 787-9 for the westbound flight).

@ Andrew B -- Correct, those are pre-COVID amounts, so I'm sure it's looking even worse now.

As I understand , American’s Bengaluru flight originates in LAX with the same flight number and without a change of aircraft LAX SEA BLR SEA LAX

Would there be an alternative scenario where SFO and SEA flights co-exist for UA and AA? AA could be sitting on corp contracts thanks to AS's base in Seattle, and CA (LAX, SJC, SAN, PDX, etc.) while UA will capture the mighty tech hub of SFO.

@terence that is exactly what will happen, and since nobody here mentioned it there are a lot more South Indian cities that tech workers in Seattle or the Bay area come from, not just Bangalore. Both the flights will act as a catchment for all passengers from MAA or HYD or any small towns around the area and around BLR. For all these folks, either of these two flights are a better travel idea than changing in Delhi etc.

Eh? Did Qantas also modify their 787-9s to enable the 9,009-mile run between Perth and London? And if it’s a software fix that can improve fuel management, can everyone do it on their planes as well?

"These are entirely software changes, so it seems to be a relative easy fix," said Boeing 737 MAX team.

Is there any information on when the tickets foe the SFO-BLR route will go on sale? I looked on united.com and don't see them yet.

@Rico

Hear, hear!

More broadly, just because software isn't tangible doesn't mean it's not intricate or challenging. It may be relatively easy to load/unload software onto a system, but its modification, creation, testing, etc., is in itself a task as difficult as any other engineering task. (The 737 Max as a great example.)

The most fuel efficient SFO-BLR route would be the north-south polar route that passes through Communist Chinese airspace. With increased tensions between US-CCP and India-CCP, what if Communist China denies the flyover rights? Would the 787-9 have enough range to take a more westerly route over Central Asia?

P.S. Communist China threatened to revoke flyover rights from Cathay Pacific flights (and rejected landing rights for flights to mainland China) during the height of the Hong Kong democratic / anti-government protests last year until Cathay can verify the political inclinations of the crew. So it is always a possibility.

@Mike C,

there are plenty of anomalies involving Melbourne - MEL is also closer to SIN and BKK than SYD is, and SYD is closer to HKG than MEL by just 15km.

Despite Melbourne being 700km southwest of Sydney - well 707 according to when Qantas awarded points based on kilometres rather than miles - it is generally closer to anything west of Hong Kong.

Looking at a mercator projection map will always distort real distances

You keep pushing the AA not flying to BLR. They are and will. Plenty of tech people in SEA, and will connect traffic to/from AS. BLR can handle many many flights from the US to service Southern India, that has a very robust traveling population, with money. Don't be surprised to see UA or AA go double daily at some point, since there are many tech cities in the South.

Also transfering in DEL and BOM is a pain, and can involve a nightmare switch of terminals. When traveling to/from India (which I do alot) its best to arrive straight into your destination from outside of the country.

All of the India action is not regulated to BOM and DEL. There is a reason why BA put its new club world A350 into BLR as one of the first routes. I also remember the clueless and painfully subtle racist comments about the new A350 being wasted on India.

If you consider traffic to Seattle from south India (rather than just Bangalore) then it’s quite a lot. Consider Bangalore’s hinterland. Today it gets distributed with exits from almost 8-10 airports in south India that connect Seattle via Middle East or Europe. Most of this may get consolidated depending on ticket prices. So I think this American and Alaska Airlines alliance should go ahead with Seattle Bangalore flight.

Yes jordan ,blr is the next big player in the iindian market,many airlines are upgrading their flight to blr....the flight to US was coming,but was a bit late....there is a huge market from to many US destinations like san fransisco ,new york ,chicago etc

Uh, excuse me...other airlines are adding Cancun and Fort Myers during covid19 but...UA is announcing new int'l routes during covid19. Flying and announcing are not even in the same airspace.

Wait, airlines can just tinker around with software and/or engine hardware to make planes more efficient? Why doesn't every airline do this with all of their planes?

This flight is all about the direct connection to blr. No one transfers in india if they can avoid it. Indian airports are a pain for connections, especially international to domestic. DEL is the only one designed for it and even it's not as good at it as the big hub airports like LHR FRA SIN HKG DXB etc. For example if you're going to MAA or HYD most people would rather transfer in LHR FRA or DXB rather than deal with delays and missed connections within India.

Furthermore, BLR does not have that many flights into these cities and they're certainly not timed for connection traffic. Even larger airports like DEL and BOM often require layovers of 4 to 5 hours to get the morning flight into even big cities like Chennai. In contrast, LHR FRA, DXB, etc act basically like scissor hubs, bringing traffic from around the world together and then shuffling them onto their destination flights within a few hours.

If I'm flying to MAA I'm not transferring in BLR, even if I live in SF. I'd rather take a 1-stop through dxb or hkg. It'll usually be faster with less layover time not to mention a better on board experience. And if I live in Chicago or Atlanta, I *might* connect through SFO or SEA to get to BLR since it's a domestic transfer with plenty of flights in case of delays. But that depends on how many hours of additional flying I'm doing to backtrack such a huge distance. But I'm certainly not doing a 2-stop to get to MAA...

(FWIW Air India manages this better by having direct flights to HYD and BLR: they stop in DEL but you continue on the same flight to your final destination. No need to connect, and no worries about missing your flight due to delays)

Feeder airports in south India such as Hubli, Belgaum, Mysore, Vijayawada, Tirupati, Bellary, Salem, Madurai, Coimbatore, Kolhapur, Rajamundry and many others like Indore, Nagpur, Bhopal, etc etc; and other tier two and three cities that do not have an airport yet have people who travel. They have to Essentially go to a major airport to fly to USA. For those going to NW USA Bangalore Seattle direct flight becomes a good option. They have to get to a major airport even if they want to fly to Middle East or Europe or Eastwards. They can avoid that extra changeover. When terminal 2 opens in Bangalore next year more direct flights to new destinations are on cards. Over the next 5-8 years it may become the leading airport in the country.

Lune, you are certainly wrong as blr is well connected to major airports in india....especially to MAA and HYD...and infact blr has a single terminal for both domestic and international....i don't know what makes it difficult for transferring...

Yes sanjya, blr airport is developing rapidly and more flights will start once the new terminal starts...

@ Weymar M Osborne

Aircraft and engines are sold with a thrust rating which dictates the maximum takeoff weight of the aircraft. To reduce the expense of purchasing the aircraft airlines at times decide to not purchase the full rating which would in effect would limit the range or restrict the load carried by aircraft operated by that airline. United has done this in the past such as with the 777-200ER. When they transitioned from the 747 to 777 in Australia they negotiated with Boeing to increase the max certified thrust for the aircraft thereby reducing any weight penalty on the flights. This could be the case in this situation to make these flights workable.

Another possibility is that Boeing or the engine manufacturer created additional enhancements over time to improve efficiency that were not available at the time of original purchase of the aircraft and these are now going to be purchased and included in the aircraft. These enhancements could have been the result of for example Boeing competing for the Qantas sun rise project.

Either way the airline must pay for the additional capabilities in the aircraft. In this situation the answers could be that this was a negotiated part of the 737 MAX grounding as part of the compensation without any cash having to change hands. This is just speculation though.

So nothing about cutting some weight? (i.e. reducing the 3-3-3 format in economy to go with 2-4-2?) If they have that many routes, they could reserve a few aircrafts for ultra long-haul with a more favourable seating for economy folks. Of course, that'll never happen!

Didn't AA announce they are shifting some long haul traffic to JFK with the code sharing with jetblue ?
They also announce Israel flights through jfk so maybe they might add an Indian flight also

Ben!
You said something positive about United! Amazing! But perhaps it’s simply because DL isn’t part of this particular scenario.
Anyway, Bully for You!

What about new international routes from Denver?

United still operates the archaic 2-2-2 biz class config on their SFO-DEL non stop routes. Air India SFO-DEL business is 2-3-2. Hoping to see the new Polaris biz on UA104/5 soon.

Also to be taken into account is the fact that the economics on the route is going to be even tougher for UA given the distance. It still remains to be seen if it will be like LAX-SIN which got canned when SQ launched the route. I just don't see UA sustaining 1x daily SFO-DEL, ORD-DEL, SFO-BLR on top of 1x daily EWR-DEL and EWR-BOM. That is way too much.... But UA is never shy at launching new long haul routes.. they are used to throwing darts at the board and seeing what sticks. This is simply a reaction to AA's SEA-BLR launch, which clearly shows that UA sees a lot of potential in AA's SEA-BLR route...

I wonder when will they fly the 1-2-1 polaris configuration in business on the SFO - Del route. I know they flew it on Thursday Sep 17 2020 from SFO to Del since my friend was on it. After that not a single day showed that configuration in either direction. It is all 2-2-2 config.

TL;DR version: This is a great option for the Seattle market starved for direct connectivity to India. Personally I’d rather it be Mumbai but Bangalore will be a fine hub.

The mistake you’re making is to count only the traffic terminating in Bangalore. I’m from Mumbai and I’ve been living in Seattle for years. We have an office in Pune. Pre-Covid I traveled 4x yearly to Pune. To get to Pune is a PITA!

As an example, Emirates is my best choice from Seattle, so that’s around 22 hours to Mumbai with a layover in DXB + 3-4 hours to exit baggage & customs (have you seen the lines in BOM when the DXB A380 lands?!?) + 5 hours by car to Pune. Total: 30+ hours door-to-door.

Instead, with this AA non-stop, it’s 16h 45m to BLR arriving a little past midnight. There’s plenty of time to clear baggage and customs and catch the first flight to Pune. There’s also a sufficient buffer for delays. So, 6h 35m layover and 1h 35m to PNQ. Another hour to get to location. 26 hours total.

AA 180
SEA ——> BLR
5:55PM 12:05 AM

IndiGo 699
BLR ——> PNQ
6:40AM 8:15AM

I’m still better off by 4-5 hours and I didn’t have to travel 5 hours by road in India after my 24 hours international journey. There’s a Priority Pass lounge in the BLR domestic terminal that’s probably just fine if it’s like the one in Mumbai.

All in all, I’m excited to try this route once Covid-19 disruptions lift. A lot of my friends in Seattle mirror this opinion.

I guess Qantas achieved the PER-LHR route nonstop by putting a relatively lower amount of seats (compared to other 787-9s).

It's the night of 11/04/2021 and I:m typing this from onboard a delayed UA 801 EWR + DEL.

777-300ER. This one has the 1-2-1 config on Polaris Business.

BTW, does anyone here know if there are seating config updates coming to the modified 787-9s for the SFO -BLR run?