Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

liveandletsfly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 110 posts

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#91

Post by zymhan »

Digory wrote: post #27

"...777 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure ... and also before Dulles engine failure, for reasons having nothing to do with the Dulles engine failure." To be fair, I read all of it, and both sides of the question interest me. But the engine failure and the economics of the 777 are totally different things.

Why are they totally different? For such an old airframe, the only significant costs are fuel and maintenance.

A revamp to the maintenance schedule that requires more frequent engine overhauls absolutely makes the economics of operating 777-200s even less appealing.

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#92

Post by kelnos »

pdabbadabba wrote: post #69
rottencupcakes wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every drink is for sale, even coffee. They aggressively use the bag sizer and try to take bags away at the gate, under the ruse that their tiny Airbus overhead bins cannot fit them (they can).

Huh. None of that happened on either of my Lufthansa flights between Frankfurt and Berlin last week. YMMV, I guess.

I saw the baggage dance bit before a Lufthansa flight to Frankfurt (from Seattle) in October, and before the connecting flight to Sarajevo.

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#93

Post by [deleted] »

arjie wrote: post #74
carbocation wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article explicitly says that the aircraft is safe. I don't think this is particularly clickbait-y.

I recall clickbait meaning "A way of describing what's behind a link, often inaccurately, so that you click on it". The completely non-controversial article seems to me to have a very hook-y headline which is exactly what the phrase refers to, at least to me. What does clickbait mean to you? Perhaps the meaning of the phrase has changed in different groups over time.

[deleted]

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#94

Post by kelnos »

thedrbrian wrote: post #61
rottencupcakes wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every drink is for sale, even coffee. They aggressively use the bag sizer and try to take bags away at the gate, under the ruse that their tiny Airbus overhead bins cannot fit them (they can).

Just put it in the hold. I can’t stand waiting for the cheapskate to find somewhere to put their 45kg “rucksack” in the over head bins just to save a tenner.

Checked luggage is lost luggage, in my experience. I think I've only checked maybe two or three bags in the past 20 years (after two lost-luggage incidents prompted me to switch to a carry-on-only packing regimen), and then only because I needed to transport liquids in excess of the in-cabin allowance.

I also like to leave the airport after my plane arrives, not stand around a conveyor belt for some unguessable amount of time.

But I get your frustration; I'm the kind of person who barely breaks stride out of the aisle and into my row as I sling my bag up into the bin. It makes me want to scream when someone is standing there in the aisle for 30+ seconds, holding up the boarding process.

Then again, the airlines are to blame as well, most of them having terribly inefficient boarding processes.

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#95

Post by cvoss »

kccqzy wrote: post #12
schmuckonwheels wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One sentence buried in an article that ledes with BIG SCARY ENGINE FAILURE.

It’s not a buried sentence. It’s a section heading in large font saying “ The 777-200 Problem Is Not Safety. It Is Economics.” Then there’s a whole paragraph stating “The Boeing 777-200 is not an unsafe airplane. As far as I can tell, that is not the issue even after the incident over Dulles over the weekend.” Then just in case the reader jumped to conclusions, the first sentence of the conclusion again says it’s saf…

You are explaining exactly why the headline is clickbait: The article does not support the conclusions implied by the headline.

> just in case the reader jumped to conclusions

The author is correcting a problem of his own creation. He has already misled the reader with his headline. He means for the reader to misunderstand... and click.

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#96

Post by kelnos »

jen20 wrote: post #77
thatfrenchguy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> United maintains a relatively consistent experience between domestic and international, minus the free alcohol. A consistent extremely mediocre experience I guess. I've flown Lufthansa, Air France, Air Canada and United with a toddler and I'd get out of my way to avoid United in the future, never seen staff everywhere in that airline that was more unpleasant and unhelpful, especially with young children, as much as…

To give my own anecdata to counter yours: every time I've flown with children on United they've gone out of their way to make it straightforward. The only better airline I've encountered for it is Virgin Atlantic, which is, to be fair, better at everything.

Interesting; I just flew Virgin Atlantic for the first time a week ago (SFO->LHR) and found the experience aggressively mediocre. Reservation management and check-in experience with their app was the hottest of hot garbage, boarding was slow, in-flight meal below average, general comfort just kinda okay. No complaints about the crew, at least.

I generally fly United (while they are also aggressively mediocre, they mostly fly direct to the places I need them to, and their pricing is generally good on the routes I take), and I'd honestly rate United higher than Virgin Atlantic, which surprised me. Maybe my single experience was a fluke, but it was a really bad first impression.

And I say this as someone who absolutely adored Virgin America back when it existed. Bizarre that the two could be so different.

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#97

Post by kelnos »

miki123211 wrote: post #14

To a European like me, United was such a weird airline to fly. There were actual commercials played before the safety video, the cabin crew warned passengers to make sure children cannot see the adult content they're watching (can you get more American than that?), and their credit card was offered multiple times during the flight. At least the WiFi was reasonably cheap. Over here, that stuff would never fly (no pun…

The credit card thing doesn't surprise me. I expect United makes a ton of revenue from the card. With how credit card transaction fees are capped in Europe, I doubt it's worth it for European airlines to bother pushing their branded card much, if they even have one in the first place.

I was on a Virgin Atlantic flight last week, and while there weren't ads before the safety video, there were three ads before every movie I tried to watch... and it was the same three ads each time.

I flew Turkish in October, and was annoyed to find the movies and TV shows heavily censored, including blanking out or dubbing over minor swear words. It was also wild to see the Qur'an in the entertainment system's reading library. (No judgement there, just notable as I've never seen the Christian Bible present on other airlines.)

I think you're just falling victim to the usual thing where what you're used to feels normal, and everything else seems weird. I've definitely experienced the same as an American, when flying on European, Latin American, and Asian airlines.

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#98

Post by kelnos »

jcims wrote: post #89
rottencupcakes wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What has become much more degraded in Europe than America is the domestic flights. Try flying Lufthansa (or one of their half dozen subsidiaries created almost entirely to give worse service) anywhere inside of europe. Everything is a money grab and the service and boarding are terrible. United maintains a relatively consistent experience between domestic and international, minus the free alcohol.

> Lufthansa I had to walk away from a $600 ticket that I booked at the last minute b/c in the 30 seconds between the time I paid for the ticket and the time the booking returned, the connecting flight filled up and I had to wait a day I didn't have for the next one. Couldn't get a single consideration from anyone, they said they couldn't cancel the ticket b/c the first leg was still available. Just had to walk away f…

Where do you live? In the US and EU at least (and presumably other places), you can cancel within 24 hours, no questions asked, for a full refund.

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#99

Post by rottencupcakes »

jcims wrote: post #89
rottencupcakes wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What has become much more degraded in Europe than America is the domestic flights. Try flying Lufthansa (or one of their half dozen subsidiaries created almost entirely to give worse service) anywhere inside of europe. Everything is a money grab and the service and boarding are terrible. United maintains a relatively consistent experience between domestic and international, minus the free alcohol.

> Lufthansa I had to walk away from a $600 ticket that I booked at the last minute b/c in the 30 seconds between the time I paid for the ticket and the time the booking returned, the connecting flight filled up and I had to wait a day I didn't have for the next one. Couldn't get a single consideration from anyone, they said they couldn't cancel the ticket b/c the first leg was still available. Just had to walk away f…

I had paid $150 or so for a extra legroom seat (on lufthansa). They did some last minute tomfoolery and my seat changed on my phone as I boarded the plane.

I was now not even in a premium economy row, but just a normal seat. I tried telling the flight attendant, who gave no shits - she just said "the plane isn't full, sit anywhere when we are in the air."

Fine, I found a premium economy aisle (still no extra legroom exit row seat, but whatever), and then filed for a refund when I landed.

They responded to my request for a refund with a form letter apologizing, but no refund. Then ignored any follow up. I had to do a charge back (no joke).

Them:

> I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to sincerely apologize for the seating issue you experienced during your recent flight. I understand that you requested an exit row seat and were not able to be accommodated, which is understandably frustrating.

> We strive to honor all seating preferences, and I regret that we were unable to meet your expectations in this instance. Please know that your feedback is important to us, and we will review our seating allocation processes to prevent similar situations in the future.

> Thank you for your understanding and patience. If there is anything further we can assist you with or if you have any other concerns, please don’t hesitate to reach out.

> We hope that you put your trust in Lufthansa and partners also in the future and continue to fly with us.

Me: This wasn't a seating preference, I paid $130 to reserve this seat. This is something I purchased. I'd expect you'd at least issue a refund and extend me some sort of credit to make up for this.

Them: crickets

Re: United 777-200 fleet faces an uncertain future after Dulles engine failure

#100

Post by jcims »

kelnos wrote: post #98
jcims wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lufthansa I had to walk away from a $600 ticket that I booked at the last minute b/c in the 30 seconds between the time I paid for the ticket and the time the booking returned, the connecting flight filled up and I had to wait a day I didn't have for the next one. Couldn't get a single consideration from anyone, they said they couldn't cancel the ticket b/c the first leg was still available. Just had to walk away f…

Where do you live? In the US and EU at least (and presumably other places), you can cancel within 24 hours, no questions asked, for a full refund.

I was in Dusseldorf headed to Budapest and I spent two hours with ticket agents, call center folks and Amex travel and couldn’t get any motion.

They said the complicating factor was that the flight out of DUS was still available. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Post reply on HN