The United B777-200s Are Living on Borrowed Time


There is no other airplane in the US quite like it. United’s B777-200s in the domestic configuration are massive passenger haulers meant for high-demand routes, and they have done that job well for over 30 years. But now, Pratt & Whitney engine issues seem to be coming to a head, and many of these planes have been sent to the desert. This feels like the beginning of the end, though when the end actually arrives remains to be seen.

Until recently, United was flying 19 of the so-called A-model aircraft. These were the earliest deliveries of the B777, and they didn’t have the range that the later versions had. The first was aptly-registered N777UA, and it went into service on June 7, 1995 from London/Heathrow to Washington/Dulles.

Over time, these airplanes were isolated toward domestic routes and given a product to match. I can recall the pain of sitting in the “double excuse me” seat in the middle of the five in the center section. There were pairs of two on the window sides. These airplanes were outfitted with recliners up front and a sea of coach seats in the back.

Eventually, they were densified, getting a small number of the cast-off front-back business class seats that United used to use internationally as well as a 3-4-3, 10-abreast configuration in the back. While the internationally-configured aircraft had 276 seats onboard, these — along with four extended range (ER) models that were put in the domestic configuration — were fitted with 364 seats. To complete the ambience, United put no in-seat video on these airplanes. They were designed to move a lot of people cheaply. And they are damn good at it.

I imagine that if United could fly these forever, it would. But they are struggling to support the engines, and that means groundings. Of the 19 A models, six are parked in Victorville, including good ole’ N777UA itself. Two of those made the trip out there this year. Oh, and of the four ERs in domestic configurations, two have joined the Victorville party.

This has understandably resulted in a lot fewer flights planned on these airplanes this year versus last. To understand the extent of the change, I went into Cirium data to compare this July’s plan with a year earlier. Here it is:

United 777-200 Route Map Jul 2026 vs Jul 2025

Green – no change, red – frequency decrease, gray – exit
Maps generated by the Great Circle Mapper® – copyright © Karl L. Swartz.

I realize that image doesn’t say a ton, but let me explain. In July 2025, there were 16 routes with regular service. This year there will be only eight. The airplane will continue to play to its strengths, shuttling travelers to and from Hawaiʻi and across the mainland.

Honolulu will have double daily from both Denver and LA with single daily service from Houston and San Francisco. Kahului will also have a single daily flight from Denver. Other than that, these airplanes will only fly Newark to both LAX and SFO twice daily along with a once daily Houston – SFO run, presumably to shuttle airplanes back into the SFO maintenance base.

Of these routes, both Denver – Kahului and Houston – Honolulu see a frequency reduction from 8x weekly to 1x daily. It’s not a big reduction, but it is a cut nonetheless since there isn’t a replacement on another fleet. But what’s interesting is to see how United has replaced the B777 elsewhere.

  • From Denver, Chicago/O’Hare and San Francisco each had 1x daily eastbound and 2x daily westbound while Houston had 13x weekly, but those have largely replaced their flying with the A321neo with additional frequencies so seats are actually flat or up
  • Denver – Kona has 1x daily and that has been downgauged to a B757-200, seats are down
  • Los Angeles – Houston had 1x daily which turns into 2x daily B737-9 MAX, seats are up
  • Los Angeles – Washington/Dulles loses 1x daily B777, but it goes into the B757-300 and B737-9 MAX which results in more seats
  • San Francisco – Chicago/O’Hare took 2x daily eastbound and 1x daily westbound and moved into the A321neo and B757-300, seats are up
  • San Francisco – Honolulu loses 2x daily B777s, but those are replaced with 2x daily B757-300 and 1x daily B737-9 MAX flights, seats are down slightly
  • San Francisco – Kona sees 1x B777 and 1x B737-8 MAX turn into 1x B757-300 and 3x B737-9 MAX, seats are up

In short, the closest thing to a B777-200, the B757-300, will do a very good job of carrying a lot of people to Hawaiʻi. And on the mainland, it’s that 200-seat A321neo which carries a lot of the load. With additional frequencies, United can capably replace the B777 in its final years.

This may not have been United’s first choice — I’m sure it would rather keep flying these airplanes — but it hasn’t missed a beat in pulling these airplanes down. Once they’re gone, that will leave Air Canada and its 440-seat B777-300ERs to carry the legacy forward of the pure, low-cost passenger hauler in North America.

Get Cranky in Your Inbox!

The airline industry moves fast. Sign up and get every Cranky post in your inbox for free.

Brett Avatar

58 responses to “The United B777-200s Are Living on Borrowed Time”

  1. BRMM Avatar
    BRMM

    Boo! I miss them on ORD-MCO.

  2. Matt D Avatar
    Matt D

    Baseline models seem to be rapidly heading towards extinction.

    The 772, the 788, and 73G are all quickly becoming rare sights.

    At least at LAX anyway.

    Bummer.

    1. Brad Avatar
      Brad

      UA’s got all of 12 788s that were delivered between 2012 and 2014, they have a LOT of life left in them.

      They’re probably the best “explorer” jet for international service, they can use them to try out interesting routes to see if they might work with a larger version.

      Seems that the 73Gs which are old and have not yet been retrofitted with NEXT might be a retirement candidate if Boeing ever gets the 7-Max certified and UA needs a few smaller jets for special airports like SNA on a cross country flight.

  3. Mike Buns Avatar
    Mike Buns

    Not sure of the difference between the 77G and 77M configurations on AeroLOPA, but I was on one of them last week from ORD to CUN. I looked quickly at the UA website before my trip and it looks like it goes most mornings. My plane went LAX-HNL, HNL-LAX, LAX-ORD (redeye) and ORD-CUN. It turned around and went back to ORD. Not sure where it went after that.

    1. Bjorn Avatar
      Bjorn

      For ORD, the present winter rotation appears to be Hawaii-DEN-ORD-LAX-Hawaii and vice versa, with a potential swap to a day turn to CUN from both DEN or ORD. I flew the DEN-ORD leg a few years ago and the ORD-LAX leg a few days ago.

    2. Silene Avatar
      Silene

      77G and 77M are almost identical except for a different lav layout at doors 3 and 4. Seats are shuffled in those areas to accommodate the different lav placement but totals are the same.

    3. MaxPower Avatar
      MaxPower

      https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n211ua

      This particular 772 is flying ORD-CUN right now and you can see all the previous flights it’s been doing (and where it’s going) if you want to know

    4. Brett Avatar

      Mike – Yep, winter is a different service plan for sure. West Coast – Hawai?i is actually a big summer market, contrary to what some may expect. So in winter some of those do shift to Cancun/Caribbean.

  4. ejwpj Avatar
    ejwpj

    I find it interesting to see single aisle aircraft co capably replacing twin aisle aircraft!

  5. Grichard Avatar
    Grichard

    Minority opinion: for 9-abreast seating, 2-5-2 is better than 3-3-3. In 3-3-3 every window seat is a “double excuse me” seat. There’s only one of those in 2-5-2. Plus lots of couples travel, which are easily accommodated in outside pairs.

    1. Bill from DC Avatar
      Bill from DC

      Very true but for the airlines, 10 > 9, pxs be damned

    2. Oliver Avatar
      Oliver

      I think you are wrong. It’s the majority opinion.

    3. CraigTPA Avatar
      CraigTPA

      True, but at least you get a window, and a shot at negotiating to move to the aisle if the center and the aisle are traveling together.

      If you’re in the double-aisle in the middle, you get nothing except misery and trading your way out of the situation is much harder.

    4. JT8D Avatar
      JT8D

      3-3-3 maximizes the chance of someone having an empty seat next to them and an empty seat next to you is one of the main drivers of passenger comfort in economy class.

  6. Bill from DC Avatar
    Bill from DC

    Ironic that one of the primary replacements, the 757-300, is an airframe 12 years older than the 777s.

    I know the -300 variant came out in the late 90s but the 757 frame dates to 1983 while the 777 was new in 1995.

    The depth and breadth of the P&W engine ineptitude is truly staggering.

  7. Hov Avatar
    Hov

    A big loss when these 777s go away is for folks up front when taking a redeye. Having a flatbed for the 5 hour LAX-EWR redeye is just a much better experience versus what’s offered on the 737 or 757. I would argue most of us didn’t care about it not being true Polaris or even when you ended up in the middle seat up there. You just put your eyeshades on and went to bed.

    So while seat totals may be unchanged, and while for daytime flights this isn’t a big deal, for those redeyes we now may have less options for comfortable sleep.

    1. BRMM Avatar
      BRMM

      Fair point in general, but LAX-EWR loses no flatbeds. Every plane United flies on that route has flatbeds, even the narrowbodies (mostly 757-200s on that route with 14 flat beds between L1 and L2, but there are some widebodies in Polaris configurations).

      1. Brad Avatar
        Brad

        And should continue, the 321s with flatbeds are coming for some of those runs, it appears they’re going to call them the “Coastliner” and UA has 40 NEOs and 50 XLRs with flatbeds and four classes of seating spec’d out on order.

        Also looks like they’ve got some 10-Max jets spec’d with lie flats, should those ever see the light of day.

      2. Hov Avatar
        Hov

        Oh that’s great news! Thanks for sharing this – I should have checked on that before just assuming that the single aisle aircraft wouldn’t have lie flat seats.

    2. Larry Avatar
      Larry

      But the A321 lie-flats are coming to LAX-EWR, so the lie-flat seat count will probably go up in reality, or at least the ratio. The domestic 777s have a pretty small lie-flat cabin compared to the huge economy section.

  8. Will in SMF Avatar
    Will in SMF

    Here’s the thing that most of these passengers are who aren’t going to like being on the pencil (753) and wannabe 75 (739M)…the 777 has two aisles. The people on these birds are leisure pax who for the most part, not the weekly consultant or thrice monthly corporate traveler, fly maybe once a year and possibly, might be their first and only trip to such locales as the islands.

    That said, they prefer two aisles so they can easily get up and use the loo because they are drinking copious amounts of mai tai’s as they begin the long-awaited vacay.

    I think this may hurt UA in the long run. But they have made such boneheaded decisions and now that they have an American Worst/US Scareways guy in charge in Scott Kirby, if they keep going down this path with such a lack of foresight, then the airline is destined to be where the original 777 is right now: in the dustheap of history in VCV!

    YMMV.

    1. Eric R Avatar
      Eric R

      Honestly won’t make one bit of difference. People are selecting based on price and schedule.

      There may be a very, very small percentage that select based on aircraft type, but there will be no alternative for them to go to once UA pulls there 777, so I would be willing to guess a good percentage of this small percentage stays with UA.

      1. Bill from DC Avatar
        Bill from DC

        Exactly. Once a year leisure travelers only care about three things, price, schedule and price.

        Once a year leisure passengers are immaterial even as a combined group and should never drive any major airline’s strategy, route planning or aircraft decisions.

        1. Kilroy Avatar
          Kilroy

          > Once a year leisure passengers are immaterial even as a combined group and should never drive any major airline’s strategy, route planning or aircraft decisions.

          I get your point in broad terms about not focusing on catering to occasional leisure travelers too much, but I disagree some and think you’re taking it to too much of an extreme.

          There are a number of routes where leisure pax who only fly a few times a year likely make up a majority of the butts in the seats and a significant portion of revenue. I’m specifically thinking of destinations like Florida (MCO in particular), the Caribbean, and Hawaii, as well as emigres flying long haul internationally to places like India, SE Asia, South America, and the Philippines to visit family.

          For that matter, I know of some leisure pax who choose to do only 1-3 (very expensive) leisure trips per year who prefer Delta One when available. They are definitely a minority in that fare class, but I would argue that they still meet the definition of infrequent leisure travelers.

          Even if the main profits come from the premium seats up front (or from the banks who paid for the mileage that the pax are burning on award travel), the infrequent leisure travelers still have their own individual preferences and remember their past experiences (good and bad). Thus, I’d argue that they need to be considered at least some when it comes to strategy, route planning, and aircraft decisions, as they can still create enough revenue to make a route profitable or not in what is a very competitive industry.

      2. Kilroy Avatar
        Kilroy

        Agreed. Unless there has been a crash or near miss in the news that is getting eyeballs by playing up the “scary aircraft model” angle, I would wager that < 5% of the pax at the gate (let alone at the time of booking) know what aircraft model they are flying. As long as it doesn't have props (and turboprops are getting rare these days in US mainland airline service), I think most pax care far more about the service, seat, and interior of the plane (let's be honest, we all judge based on scuffs & dings near our seats) than the model itself.

        1. ptahcha Avatar
          ptahcha

          Fun fact: I had a colleague tried to tell me that the first 3 digits of the ticket number (after the stock number) tells you the aircraft type. It was debunked fairly quickly.

    2. DTWNYC Avatar
      DTWNYC

      The issue is with Pratt & Whitney engines. United is currently the only airline in the world (IIRC) that is flying 777s with PW engines. The GE 777s don’t have this issue. So this is 100% unrelated to Kirby or “boneheaded” decisions. They have been parking P&W 777s in order to preserve the longevity of that fleet for cycles and/or spares. Otherwise they risk parking the entire fleet.

      Secondarily, anyone that flies DL, AS, WN, HA, AA, and even UA today is likely flying on a narrow body to Hawaii. So the rant about the occasional punter going to the islands, seems to be OK with a 737 or A321 on other carriers.

    3. Mark Avatar
      Mark

      I’ve recently taken UA flights in coach on an HD 777-200, a 737 MAX, and an A321.

      I’d 100% take the MAX or A321 over the HD 777 any time. With the 757-300s getting the new interiors later this year, they will also soon have a nice product.

    4. CallScheduling Avatar
      CallScheduling

      Lol what did Kirby do to you?
      UA is currently in the best financial position its ever been in. They’ll be fine when the 777HD go away.

  9. GRT Avatar
    GRT

    These are aircraft I avoid. Not risking myself to be in some technical situation mid air.

    Same goes with AC rouge A320 family. Not risking my life on those. Thankfully those are exiting too.

    If any doubt, please see Avherald.com, plug in Rouge in the search box, and enjoy the results. Regulators should be ashamed.

    1. CraigTPA Avatar
      CraigTPA

      I don’t know if there’s that much of an actual safety difference between the Rouge A320 family planes and everybody else. Flying is so safe that even doubling or tripling the risk is still moving from almost zero to just slightly less almost zero.

      OTOH, avoiding Air Canada planes is a good idea simply because they are Air Canada planes offering Air Canada service in an Air Canadaish way.

  10. Brad Avatar
    Brad

    Flew these a LOT in the late 90s and 2000s DEN-ORD and DEN-SFO, great ride and occasionally they’d put an international configuration on these runs. For a while there was a 6ish PM ORD-DEN flight that usually came in from AMS and got two more hours of flying to DEN and then was the 6 AM flight back to ORD before a hop back over the pond. When those were on the run back in the day with both first and business, the upgrades were almost guaranteed to clear. SFO was a little less predictable but sometimes an extension of the workday for a TPAC bird.

    I’ve been on a bunch of the A321 hub runs (with ORD flights next week both ways) in the last year and that is a good airplane, enjoy flying on it and the benefit of replacing one widebody with two single aisle jets is you get more choices in frequency for when to go.

    The 752s are also not all that long for service, some of them are older than the 772s, the oldest 752 still flying UA was delivered in 1994 as compared to 1995 for N777UA and UA has been slowly retiring the 752 fleet. The 753s are all 2000-2003 so they’ve got a few years left in them, but it is a small fleet of 21 jets so they’ll be limited as to how much lift they can provide.

    Given the order book at UA you’re going to see a lot of Max and 321 jets with more frequency. Perhaps at some point as the 78s roll in, they convert a few of the oldest 789s (first delivery 2014) to high density domestic to do the same job that the domestic 772s have done so well?

    1. Jeff Paris Avatar
      Jeff Paris

      Rather than converting 789’s to domestic use, I suspect once United gets their share of 787-10 IGW jets, they would consider converting their original 21 787-10’s to domestic haulers with seating capacity of somewhere in the vicinity of 330 passengers. IGW versions would be replacements for the 772ER with approximately 300 passengers.

      1. Bunky Avatar
        Bunky

        Yes, this is a possibility. May see a reduction in Polaris and movement of Premium Economy to in front of Door 2 to add more Y seats. With true Polaris and Premium Economy, these jets could be used on Tranatlantic flights with heavier Economy demand as well as Domestic haulers. They also would provide the ability for EWR and IAD nonstop to Hawaii whereas the 772A units couldn’t make that distance with reduced range of the domestic version.

      2. Brad Avatar
        Brad

        Jeff,

        I’m wondering about the economics of domestic tickets on a brand new wide body. Those -10s are ideal for Europe flights, high capacity, less range than a -9 and the average fares across the pond are much better, especially premium, as compared to domestic flying between hubs and Hawaii. If the other carriers are running narrow bodies to Hawaii, it is going to be hard to get a premium fare above what they are charging for a 737 first class seat and remain competitive in the market. IMO this is underusing the asset, especially new.

        That is why I suggested taking some of their oldest -9s and doing the high capacity trick there, those frames will be 14-15 years old or more and will have run enough international work to pay off the jet so IMO they’d be more cost competitive on domestic service versus a brand new frame.

        I also think that at some point you’ll see UA order either the 77X or make that A350 order work to have a bigger international frame, and the 77x is particularly good at cargo (as is the current 772/3 fleet) which is an important factor in some international flying.

  11. southbay flier Avatar
    southbay flier

    I remember flying this plane from SFO – DEN years ago when it was 2-5-2 in Y and it was quite comfy. I miss domestically configured widebodies. They always felt more comfortable than narrow bodies.

  12. Anthony Avatar
    Anthony

    Don’t call them the A-model. Call them by their proper name: Noah’s Ark.

  13. mike Avatar
    mike

    UA recently said in an internal memo that these were going to be parked for the summer and are expected to be back for 2027. They’re having trouble sourcing engines in a timely manner but the plane is for them to be back 2027.

  14. Tim Dunn Avatar
    Tim Dunn

    UA apparently is asking the FAA for an extension on certain parts of the engine but Pratt and Whitney has basically said they are not going to support the PW4000. UA appears to be focused on keeping the PW4000 777-200ERs in service but none of the Pratt 777s have much life in them even if UA gets the parts extension.

    UA was the last US airline to have domestically configured widebodies and they were much more necessary when UA’s network was much less developed than it is now – as well as to hold its position in Hawaii. Narrowbodies can do the lower 48 work plus to Hawaii.
    The real question will be how quickly UA has to accelerate retirements of the entire Pratt 777 fleet and how much growth they will have once that happens.

    1. MaxPower Avatar
      MaxPower

      If you look at United’s order book, I doubt anyone is too concerned about their growth potential. ;)

      https://ir.united.com/node/33216/html
      Page 35

      48 787 deliveries in 2026 (out of a total 180 new aircraft deliveries in 2026) should do the trick nicely, if needed.

      Or 20 787s out of 120 depending on whether you’re looking at contractual (i.e. UA probably gets some delay compensation) vs expected

      1. Brad Avatar
        Brad

        Max,

        Look further right in that table, UA’s contract called for 48 deliveries this year plus 9 in 2027, but they expect to actually take 20 in 2026 and 27 in 2027, so they’ll still be fewer going on property than what they contractually requested.

        And the next 30 will be the high J configuration committed to the very premium routes. So that eats up 2/3 of the jets that are coming.

        1. Tim Dunn Avatar
          Tim Dunn

          thank you, Brad.

          And UA’s 767s are the same age as DL’s so UA has no choice but to start planning on using a lot of its widebody order book for fleet replacement.

          and the issue with UA’s 787 orders is that Boeing keeps rolling the delayed planes onto the existing orders – which is why the 2026 contractual 787 deliveries is so large.
          At some point, Boeing will deliver large numbers of 787s and UA’s capex will soar… it is expected to be over $12 billion this year but that includes a lot of contractual purchases that will not happen.

          UA simply did not want to be in the position of potentially having to replace 50 PW 777s in a couple of years but they may have no other choice – but offset some of the lost 777As with narrowbodies.

          You have to wonder if part of UA’s decision to go with the GTF on their 321NEOs was related to the earlier Pratt 4000 problems and, once Pratt/RTX had a signed contract for GTF 321NEOs, they decided to walk away from supporting the PW4000s

        2. MaxPower Avatar
          MaxPower

          Hey Brad
          I mentioned expected vs contractual in my post if you read it all. 120 deliveries, worst case, in 2026 isn’t too bad. In fact, I’d have to go back and look but I’d imagine it’s the highest or close to the highest number of new deliveries for any airline ever in a year (maybe UA competing with itself for that title though — maybe AA with all their deliveries circa ~2015). Far far above what United needs for replacements.

          Besides, as Cranky’s post notes. the new 787s aren’t really replacing the 77A or 77E anyway. Those old 777s are primarily flying routes that a NEO or MAX can fly (on a 2 for 1 basis) and that ignores the other 777s and 764s (my guess for what will replace the ORD/IAH/EWR flying to Hawaii given how crazy efficient they are) United still has.

          But sure. If 120 new planes in 2026 (then 93 in 2027) alone has people concerned about United’s growth by replacing ~20 777s (with high density, of course), then I guess we can just agree to disagree. The 763s have to be replaced eventually, but those birds aren’t anywhere near as awful in the interior as DL 763s since United refurbished their interiors and they still have a decent life ahead of them for a few years in their new high-J LOPA. But they aren’t going to Hawaii — they’re doing great where they are in markets like LHR where it’s ‘more beds the merrier’. Ironically, the UA 763 playbook seems to be straight from Delta — redo the interior then distract from an old plane with something like starlink wifi.

          213 new planes over the next two years seems like some decent growth to cover a small percentage of the UA 777 fleet that UA has long been aware are quite old but hey, disagreement is the fun of the comment section.

          Keep Climbing or let Good lead the way. Whatever floats your boat

          1. Brad Avatar
            Brad

            Sorry, Max, I didn’t put 2+2 together with your 20 jets in 2026 addition.

            The Smisek era put UA with one of the oldest fleets in the US – the big orders are two pronged both fleet expansion and fleet refreshes. You mentioned the 763s and they’ll be due to start being retired soon now, the oldest and majority have a 19 as part of their delivery date. Just like the 753s, the 764s are newer but with only 16 of those it is again a small fleet. Just how many fleets of 16 and 21 do they really want to operate, even if the pilots can crossover?

            For the narrow bodies, the 319/320 jets are also aging out in the next 5-7 years I’d guess those will all be gone.

            While the 77s are in the desert primarily with engine needs, I’ve also heard that some of the older buses have similar engine issues but in some cases they’re also rotating older buses out to the desert to manage cycles to try and prolong the fleet as much as they can.

            1. MaxPower Avatar
              MaxPower

              Great points and I agree. UA has some old narrowbodies. I’m pretty sure I’ve flown on half those old Airbus in their Ted days and that’s saying something…

            2. Brad Avatar
              Brad

              Max,

              I was going to mention Ted, bet I flew on a majority of the Ted planes, I was doing DEN-PHX a lot during the Ted era.

              Just a couple of weeks ago I was on one of the newest 319s, all updated and fresh inside, but still 20+ years old, they can get another decade out of these, but eventually…

            3. Bunky Avatar
              Bunky

              United is taking so many new aircraft their average age is dropping. It’s now 15.3 years, just slightly behind DL’s 15 and American’s 14.4.
              UA is retiring a good number of 319/320s this year. Some have been parked in VCV probably to seave cycles until Summer.
              Mainline fleet is 1088, well above DL and AA.

  15. phllax Avatar
    phllax

    I’m surprised they’re not at least keeping all of the ER’s online over the non-ER’s. I know they’ve used the ER’s to DUB, MAD and other “near” European destinations before or as last minute subs.

    1. Brett Avatar

      phllax – You’re talking about the domestic-configured ERs? Even the A models can do east coast to Europe if needed, so it shouldn’t make much of a difference if they needed a one-off sub. But the two parked ERs were the first ones parked back in June. I wonder if maybe they needed heavy checks or something that made it make more sense to park them.

      1. JT8D Avatar
        JT8D

        If they’re having troubles with the engines on those things, the idea of a 777A to Europe doesn’t fill me with joy.

        1. Phllax Avatar
          Phllax

          Engines are easily interchangeable if the same make, and the ER’s have seatback video, which is why they have used them to Europe.

  16. hk Avatar
    hk

    UA has been parking more or less one 777 each month since mid 2025. With this rate, we will stop seeing high density 777 sometime next year unless UA rather ground ERs instead, which is unlikely.
    More and more 772s and 773s are grounded by Asiana and Korean air as well but KE will retire four Jin air 777s this year to support mainline operation. Unsure how ANA copes with this engine issue but with such few operators remaining, it’s not surprising that PW rather prioritizes other issues.

  17. Blaine Avatar
    Blaine

    As a DEN-based flyer, I’m genuinely curious what they’ll replace this lift with. Right now, between 2x HNL and 1x OGG daily, that’s like 1,100 seats a day. Sometimes KOA gets the HD 777 too, otherwise KOA and LIH are on the B752. Is that the only narrow body with the legs to make it? I’m not sure if a new A321neo in the 200-seat config has the range from hot-and-high Denver. They’re not gonna dedicate a premium XLR to this market. So it seems like, they’ll need to convert some GE-powered 772ERs to a HD config, or…..?

    1. Brett Avatar

      Blaine – It’s a great question, and yeah, I think the 752 is probably the only one in the fleet. My guess is that more likely is they will just put an international-configured widebody on those routes.

  18. Eric Avatar
    Eric

    I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the number of 787-9 orders that United recently converted to the -10 almost exactly matches the number of PW-powered 777s in the fleet. I am curious if some of those will be delivered in a high-density “domestic” configuration (recliners instead of lie-flat), though.

    1. Walter Avatar
      Walter

      I would imagine that they’d actually be replaced by UA’s older 787-10s. They’d require minimal rework and would have notably less range than the new ones coming in now. Maybe some -9s would also see domestic configurations and expanded to other routes.

      1. Blaine Avatar
        Blaine

        I agree. You could cut a couple (3?) rows of Polaris, move Premium Plus up between doors 1 and 2, and then add like 5 or 6 rows of economy. You’d get awful close to the capacity of the domestic 772, with WAY better operating costs. Those older 78X frames would be perfect for DEN-Hawaii (they’re currently flying them from ORD to the islands).

  19. jkealing Avatar
    jkealing

    My first-ever international trip, an 8th grade French class trip to Paris, was flown both ways via Chicago on one of these old A models. May have been the first time I saw personal seatback screens on a plane, as prior to that I was flying around on America West and TWA. Will be sad to see them go.

Leave a Reply to Phllax Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Cranky Flier