DOT/DAA offer United deal for SFO route

Jamie2k9 · 07-10-2012 10:20pm #1

Dep of Transport and DAA have offered UA a 5 year deal on charges for a west coast route, SFO is only optionas its a UA hub. 2 years free and reduced charges for 3.

Sikpupi · 07-10-2012 10:23pm

Link???

Jamie2k9 · 07-10-2012 10:23pm

Forgot about that:
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/article1142236.ece

Shamrock231 · 07-10-2012 10:38pm

Anyone know if EI were offered the same deal?

Jamie2k9 · 07-10-2012 10:48pm

Very unlightly I would say.

b757 · 07-10-2012 11:48pm

Read about this a few months back that it could be operated by a 777. Highly doubt it would though, id say the 767/787 could be used.

Be great if they took up the offer, nice to see a few more routes to the US from DUB.

Edit: Can't find link/post from where i read this.

murphym7 · 08-10-2012 8:03am

Great news having a direct flight to the west coast again.

munchkin_utd · 08-10-2012 8:12am

murphym7 wrote: »

Great news having a direct flight to the west coast again.

definite plans for flights have NOT been announced, simply that DAA have offered a very sweet deal to United to entice them to think about possibly scheduling a flight.

Kumsheen · 08-10-2012 8:45am

Shamrock231 wrote: »

Anyone know if EI were offered the same deal?

Of course - Deals are available to anyone.

But EI have said the cost of fuel is prohibitive at the moment for a West Coast operation.

BuffyBot · 08-10-2012 9:09am

Can't see it happening tbh. Not enough demand for a daily service, so it means tying up a 767 for low yield service. I don't think United are basing 787's in SFO initially, so I can't see that coming.

pclive · 08-10-2012 9:37am

I hope the same deal was offered to EI

LeftBlank · 08-10-2012 11:17am

BuffyBot wrote: »

Can't see it happening tbh. Not enough demand for a daily service, so it means tying up a 767 for low yield service. I don't think United are basing 787's in SFO initially, so I can't see that coming.

There could be demand - don't forget that Facebook/Google are both based in the SFO area and both have their European HQ's in Dublin, something I don't think was there when there was a west coast flight from DUB.

Bearcat · 08-10-2012 12:20pm

Govt I'm sure would love to see EIN go back to west coast ops. Problem is EIN are a tiny tiny operator in the broad scheme of things with their 7 a330s. A 330 operating to SFO ex DUB is gone nearly 30hrs from base before its ready to depart again. Assume 12 hr block Useage each leg with 3 hrs down time both sides of the rotation. Now you are in to heavy crews, availability of crews dissolving from already a limited crew base.

I can't see it happening re efficiency. EIN have high efficiency with their current 330 sched dipping into the east coast with ORD and the odd MCO. Plus they use the 330s for AGP before it sets sail on the late JFK rotation. Next summer I am aware there will be 2 flights a day to ORD.

Pulling west coast into the fray is an impossibility unless the goal posts change in 2014 but the 2013 sched for EIN appears a wrap.

Zonda999 · 08-10-2012 2:49pm

Would a 763ER even be capable to doing DUB to SFO? It would be at the edge fo the 763's range surely.

It would be nice to have a west coast USA route from Dublin for sure but I reckon the best chance is with EI on a seasonal basis. Anyone know how EI's UA codeshare from MAD to IAD is doing lately? That ending would free up another A332 for Dublin.

IRLConor · 08-10-2012 3:11pm

LeftBlank wrote: »

There could be demand - don't forget that Facebook/Google are both based in the SFO area and both have their European HQ's in Dublin, something I don't think was there when there was a west coast flight from DUB.

Google were here back then, but they're much bigger now. There's also Apple, Cisco, HP, Intel and Oracle who have facilities here and headquarters in the bay area. Amazon and Microsoft have HQs in Seattle which would generate some connecting flight business from it. Out of my office alone (~10 people here, ~150 in the whole company) there'd be a couple of round trips a month. I don't have a good feel for how many people would be regular travellers to the west coast though, it's hard to estimate how many of the employees of those companies would be regular travellers.

A daily service would require about 1,000 return passengers a week to hit an 85% load factor on their smallest 767 (a quick Google says that this is their average elsewhere). If they were willing to take a load factor of 75% (approx what Aer Lingus does long haul) then they'd need about 900 return passengers a week.

To do 3 days a week with their smallest 767 they'd need ~400-450 return passengers per week. That sounds a bit more plausible to me.

b757 · 08-10-2012 3:22pm

Zonda999 wrote: »

Would a 763ER even be capable to doing DUB to SFO? It would be at the edge fo the 763's range surely.

It would be nice to have a west coast USA route from Dublin for sure but I reckon the best chance is with EI on a seasonal basis. Anyone know how EI's UA codeshare from MAD to IAD is doing lately? That ending would free up another A332 for Dublin.

Yes, I think it is capable.

MAD-IAD ending at the end of this month. I think the A/c will be used on extra frequencies on the US routes from next summer.

martinsvi · 08-10-2012 4:20pm

range for both, 767 and 332/333 are above 10,000 km, DUB-SFO is little over 8,000 km

LeftBlank · 08-10-2012 4:21pm

Zonda999 wrote: »

Would a 763ER even be capable to doing DUB to SFO? It would be at the edge fo the 763's range surely.

Pretty sure that Delta run a 763ER on SEA-AMS route (could be wrong though).

L1011 · 08-10-2012 5:17pm

A lot of people I know who have to go to the west coast for work would honestly prefer to stick with an east coast, but their employers would very much prefer to put them on a non-stop. Some are already sent via LHR frequently if the connection times work out better.

The market has to be there now and I imagine EI would be on it if they had the craft.

stopthepanic · 08-10-2012 5:24pm

Zonda999 wrote: »

Would a 763ER even be capable to doing DUB to SFO? It would be at the edge fo the 763's range surely.

According to Boeing all 767 models have the range.
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/767family/pf/pf_rc_london.html

BuffyBot · 08-10-2012 5:59pm

Would a 763ER even be capable to doing DUB to SFO? It would be at the edge fo the 763's range surely.

Perfectly doable - they are operating/soon to be starting a SFO - CDG flight with one.

boeingboy · 08-10-2012 6:20pm

Sfo-Dub and vv absolutely no problem at all for the 76.

About 9 hr 50 eastbound and 10 30 westbound working on average winds.
Longest Ive done was 13 hours 15 and still landed with 5t.
Those winglets sure make a difference.

IRLConor · 08-10-2012 6:23pm

MYOB wrote: »

A lot of people I know who have to go to the west coast for work would honestly prefer to stick with an east coast, but their employers would very much prefer to put them on a non-stop. Some are already sent via LHR frequently if the connection times work out better.

Those people are insane. Why would you want two long legs, one being treated as a domestic flight? The preference among almost everyone I know who travels to SFO is:

Direct
Short leg, then long leg (e.g. DUB-LHR-SFO)
Long leg, then short leg (e.g. DUB-LAX-SFO when DUB-LAX was alive)
Any other two leg option
Multiple connections

Out of my direct colleagues, the preference is usually DUB-LHR-SFO with BA or Virgin. One guy likes Lufthansa and has decent status with them so he goes DUB-FRA-SFO. There's only one guy who flies to the east coast and for some reason best known to him he flies through Philadelphia with US Airways.

Tenger · 08-10-2012 8:20pm

Bearcat wrote: »

Govt I'm sure would love to see EIN go back to west coast ops. Problem is EIN are a tiny tiny operator in the broad scheme of things with their 7 a330s. A 330 operating to SFO ex DUB is gone nearly 30hrs from base before its ready to depart again......

Agreed. EI would need 2 additional A330's to operate a DUB-SFO/LAX service 'properly' (minimum 4 days a week) According to their latest figures they are getting >90% load factor on their Ireland -USA routes.....so why take a chance on a more costly service when you get guaranteed revenue going to JFK/BOS/ORD?
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0906/aer-lingus-passenger-number-up-2-in-august-business.html

IRLConor wrote: »

Out of my direct colleagues, the preference is usually DUB-LHR-SFO.......There's only one guy who flies to the east coast and for some reason best known to him he flies through Philadelphia with US Airways.

Maybe he is a closet masochist

lord lucan · 08-10-2012 8:51pm

b757 wrote: »

MAD-IAD ending at the end of this month. I think the A/c will be used on extra frequencies on the US routes from next summer.

That aircraft is going to take up the the extra Chicago flight(EI123) ex-DUB from the end of March next year IIRC.

E.S.T. · 08-10-2012 9:26pm

With Aerlingus moving to terminal 5 in JFK alongside jetBlue and could also move to terminal C in Boston with jetBlue, why would you need a direct flight to San Francisco?

markpb · 08-10-2012 9:56pm

E.S.T. wrote: »

With Aerlingus moving to terminal 5 in JFK alongside jetBlue and could also move to terminal C in Boston with jetBlue, why would you need a direct flight to San Francisco?

Shorter flying time, less hassle, less things that can go wrong and duty fee shopping spring to mind without a moments thought.

IRLConor · 08-10-2012 11:00pm

Tenger wrote: »

Maybe he is a closet masochist

Well, they keep upgrading him so maybe he considers that suitable compensation.

E.S.T. wrote: »

With Aerlingus moving to terminal 5 in JFK alongside jetBlue and could also move to terminal C in Boston with jetBlue, why would you need a direct flight to San Francisco?

A quick search on Hipmunk tells me that the fastest option to get to SFO from Dublin takes about 14 hours*. Above, boeingboy says that a direct flight in a 767 would be approx 10 hours. Why would you waste at least 4 hours of your life between excess flying and connecting nonsense?

* DUB-LHR with EI, 1h40 in LHR, then LHR-SFO with BA.

munchkin_utd · 09-10-2012 9:14am

IRLConor wrote: »

A quick search on Hipmunk tells me that the fastest option to get to SFO from Dublin takes about 14 hours*. Above, boeingboy says that a direct flight in a 767 would be approx 10 hours. Why would you waste at least 4 hours of your life between excess flying and connecting nonsense?

Funny you mention that.
My sister flew this time last year to LAX and actually appreciated the break in the journey in the USA compared to the long haul from Europe (via LHR which she normally did) sitting 10hours+ on a plane.

the ability to stretch your legs and go for a feed would be one of the positives of a well timed break in the journey.

Going via heathrow or frankfurt obviously has no such benefit but a break in the USA isnt the worst.

Bearcat · 09-10-2012 9:45am

E.S.T. wrote: »

With Aerlingus moving to terminal 5 in JFK alongside jetBlue and could also move to terminal C in Boston with jetBlue, why would you need a direct flight to San Francisco?

Has JetBlue terminal in BOS capacity to take 330s? I don't think so......

Savman · 09-10-2012 12:51pm

Direct flights to the US west coast with pre-clearance and free/reduced airport charges for 4 years, has to make this very tempting for UA.

We know US & AA are tied up in a possible merger, DL want to route everyone through ATL so a direct to LAX or SFO is of no benefit to them. UA seem the only ones who can pull it off.

As much as I'd like to see it develop, I'm not sure it'll happen tbh.

E.S.T. · 09-10-2012 8:21pm

Bearcat wrote: »

Has JetBlue terminal in BOS capacity to take 330s? I don't think so......

There is a post security connector being built to connect terminal E & C so even if they can't move to C it would still allow easy connection.

IRLConor wrote: »

A quick search on Hipmunk tells me that the fastest option to get to SFO from Dublin takes about 14 hours*. Above, boeingboy says that a direct flight in a 767 would be approx 10 hours. Why would you waste at least 4 hours of your life between excess flying and connecting nonsense?

* DUB-LHR with EI, 1h40 in LHR, then LHR-SFO with BA.

You wouldn't if you had a choice but overall one connection in the same general direction as your destination adding 2-3 hours to your travel time is not that big of a deal when it is such a long travel time even when direct.

markpb wrote: »

Shorter flying time, less hassle, less things that can go wrong and duty fee shopping spring to mind without a moments thought.

You could still get duty free as long as your final destination is international and you don't have to go through security again and there is not much hassle if the connections are made simple and not far away from each other.

IRLConor · 09-10-2012 8:52pm

E.S.T. wrote: »

You wouldn't if you had a choice but overall one connection in the same general direction as your destination adding 2-3 hours to your travel time is not that big of a deal when it is such a long travel time even when direct.

I dunno, I find that the longer the travel time is the more intolerant I get of extra delays. The fastest I've ever managed door-to-door is about 17 hours. I do my level best to get the shortest affordable total time. Time spent in transit is lost time, especially if you have to get up the next day and be in to work at a reasonable hour.

DOT/DAA offer United deal for SFO route

Comments