United HKG-SIN-HKG to go 737

[ek&sq]

Let me be the first to say goodbye to UA/CO's HKG-SIN-HKG route. A real shame it has come to what it has because this route has existed for as long as I can remember, and always has been served by 747s.

[demue]

Unless there is rock bottom pricing they will have issues even filling a 737 with these offerings. For half the price of SQ/CX and full mileage accruing fares I would still consider it as it is a less than 4hrs flight. Otherwise no thanks.

PS: UAs Eco food is so horrible that I didn't eat it even on SIN-NRT so I ll manage and come prepared. Not a real loss in my view but regular travelers will not be pleased I would guess.

[willzzz88]

Looks like UA/CO in *ECONOMY* is ready to sell rock-bottom fares to New York via Hong Kong.

Hey it may work!

The C will be normal.

Remember SQ's A345 consumes 10-15% more *FUEL* than a 77L or 77E!

[fone]

PS: UAs Eco food is so horrible that I didn't eat it even on SIN-NRT so I ll manage and come prepared. Not a real loss in my view but regular travelers will not be pleased I would guess.

My wife finds even UA (international) C food to be horrible and prefers SQ Y food to that.

That means no more UA for me. Is the SIN - NRT still 777, otherwise no more UA to USA for me too. I'm guessing they will be selling the tickets to unsuspecting customers flying via HKG to ORD or SFO.

[demue]

My wife finds even UA (international) C food to be horrible and prefers SQ Y food to that.

That means no more UA for me. Is the SIN - NRT still 777, otherwise no more UA to USA for me too. I'm guessing they will be selling the tickets to unsuspecting customers flying via HKG to ORD or SFO.

AFAIK the NRT flights are stil on 777. Are they further along with new C on those birds these days or is it still the old (horror) product?

[globetrekker84]

AFAIK the NRT flights are stil on 777. Are they further along with new C on those birds these days or is it still the old (horror) product?

I'm on the July 2nd flight. Currently scheduled to be on the planes with the old school barcaloungers in C.

[milehighj]

Just returned from a quick HKG trip on the 744. Again, shame that this sector is going 737, as I definitely won't be up at 4am for that 6.05am departure. At least the current flat bed makes up for the early morning timing. SIN-HKG was not full, but the load in J on HKG-SIN was near on 100%.

As an aside, I did note that the Y product on that particular 744 does not have PTVs - unlike most of the 744 fleet - so I wonder which sectors they'll redeploy it to.

[SQADL333]

You Guys Talk like having a 737 on a sector like that is a bad thing.In Australia we use those and A320's on the Tasman into smaller places like Wellington and Christchurch and nobody is complaining same for most Auckland Flights too on Pacific Blue,Jetstar,Qantas and Air New Zealand and most of these flights are of a similar duration of Singapore to Hong Kong

I would prefer more frequency with a smaller plane then not so much on a large one personally but all the same It's up to you what you choose.

[sqdazz]

Just returned from a quick HKG trip on the 744. Again, shame that this sector is going 737, as I definitely won't be up at 4am for that 6.05am departure. At least the current flat bed makes up for the early morning timing. SIN-HKG was not full, but the load in J on HKG-SIN was near on 100%.

As an aside, I did note that the Y product on that particular 744 does not have PTVs - unlike most of the 744 fleet - so I wonder which sectors they'll redeploy it to.

Huh? First I have ever heard of most UA 747's having PTV's in Y. I thought none had it.

[globetrekker84]

Just returned from a quick HKG trip on the 744. Again, shame that this sector is going 737, as I definitely won't be up at 4am for that 6.05am departure. At least the current flat bed makes up for the early morning timing. SIN-HKG was not full, but the load in J on HKG-SIN was near on 100%.

As an aside, I did note that the Y product on that particular 744 does not have PTVs - unlike most of the 744 fleet - so I wonder which sectors they'll redeploy it to.

I don't think any of the 744s have PTV in Y.

[milehighj]

Huh? First I have ever heard of most UA 747's having PTV's in Y. I thought none had it.

I don't think any of the 744s have PTV in Y.

I was under the impression that they did... If not, I stand corrected.

[FlyBoy]

No United Airlines 744 have PTV's in Y

[ek&sq]

You Guys Talk like having a 737 on a sector like that is a bad thing.In Australia we use those and A320's on the Tasman into smaller places like Wellington and Christchurch and nobody is complaining same for most Auckland Flights too on Pacific Blue,Jetstar,Qantas and Air New Zealand and most of these flights are of a similar duration of Singapore to Hong Kong

I would prefer more frequency with a smaller plane then not so much on a large one personally but all the same It's up to you what you choose.

Personally speaking, I am not upset about flying a narrowbody. Lots of LCC's A320's/737's on this sector. What I find ridiculous is that someone paying $6000 for a ticket in J to the U.S. has to endure a cr*p product on the first leg for three hours (and at an ungodly hour). It'd be ok if it were a HKG/SIN based airline. But for United, based on the other side of the world, to provide regional U.S. service intra Asia is crazy. Its like flying FRA-LAX on an LH 744 and then LAX-HNL on an LH A320. It simply doesn't make sense.

[cscs1956]

My wife finds even UA (international) C food to be horrible and prefers SQ Y food to that.

That means no more UA for me. Is the SIN - NRT still 777, otherwise no more UA to USA for me too. I'm guessing they will be selling the tickets to unsuspecting customers flying via HKG to ORD or SFO.

For the price different, I think it is fine.

[pavion]

In typical United Domestic flights, will they be removing the snacks as well from Y?