United Airlines is holding an event in October where they’ll reveal new routes they’re launching.
While it would be fun to think that they dropped the hint that one of those would be Kuala Lumpur with a drawing on the cover of the last paper issue of their Hemispheres inflight magazine, I’ve suggested that there’s just not enough premium passenger demand to make that work.
However, aviation watchdog JonNYC says that United will be adding a “different, high volume” destination in Southeast Asia.
despite that thing where UA had an image that might hint at KUL as a potential long-haul destination (negative on that,) I'd pick a different, "high volume" S.E. Asia add after the success of MNL.
— JonNYC (@xJonNYC) September 28, 2024
That seems clearly to suggest they’ll announce service to Bangkok. There’s been some speculation about Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, but that wouldn’t be nearly as high volume. The airline used to serve both destinations.
Bangkok Suvarnabhumi Airport
Bangkok, for United, was an intra-Asia route. There is no non-stop service from the United States. Thai Airways used to operate non-sop from both Los Angeles and New York JFK using Airbus A340-500 flying gas cans. Though they had reasonably high load factors, fares were too low and fuel prices too high to make the economics work. While Bangkok is generally a lower yielding destination than Singapore, where United also flies,
- They believe their service to Manila (historically low yielding) has been successful, and a U.S. carrier flying non-stop can generate higher yields than connections. United has non-stop competition from the U.S. to Manila from Philippine Airlines.
- Inflation-adjusted jet fuel prices are much lower than when Thai served U.S.-Bangkok.
- Boeing 787s are far more fuel efficient aircraft than Airbus A340-500s.
- And they could just announce an intra-Asia flight to Bangkok.
Chao Phraya River
Street Food in Bangkok’s Chinatown
While possible it seems to me less likely that the carrier could re-start a Vietnam operation. United Airlines flew Hong Kong to Ho Chi Minh City from 2004 through 2016. This was a Boeing 747-400 until 2011, downgraded to a Boeing 737-800 in 2011. At the time they had an 8% share of the Vietnam – U.S. market, while Delta and American (which didn’t serve Vietnam themselves, at all) sold 10% of tickets. Now, Vietnam Airlines flies direct from the United States with four-times weekly San Francisco – Ho Chi Minh City service using an Airbus A350.
Presidential Palace
Pho Hoa
United has an extensive Pacific network, from its acquisition of Pan Am’s network and from Continental’s Micronesia operation. They’re the only U.S. airline still selling fifth freedom flights in Asia.
Pan Am and Northwest Orient had traffic rights not just to fly to Tokyo, but special rights to fly beyond Tokyo to other destinations in Asia. Delta Air Lines inherited those rights to fly from Tokyo Narita to beyond-destinations, but the airline shut down its Tokyo hub. They got the most slots to fly to close-in Tokyo Haneda, and prefer to connect traffic over Seoul-Incheon onto their joint venture partner Korean Air rather than operating their own flights beyond Tokyo.
United Airlines picked up Pan Am’s Pacific network, which is one reason that United is so strong across the Pacific today. They merged with Continental Airlines, which had its own legacy Pacific operation and a hub in Guam. Continental Micronesia was merged into the larger combined carrier with the merger. They ceased operating intra-Asia flying completely in 2017, but used to serve places like Singapore, Seoul and Hong Kong from Hong Kong and used to fly beyond Hong Kong as well.
United Airlines launching non-stop service to Bangkok was only recently viewed as an April Fool’s joke to some, and we still don’t know whether the airline would plan San Francisco – Bangkok, or simply a fifth freedom flight like Tokyo – Bangkok on a Boeing 737 (a route only about 10% longer than Newark – San Francisco).
Trying Bangkok service wouldn’t surprise me, and would seem more likely than Saigon where there’s already competition. However I have to think that both are in the mix for consideration. United is a far more global carrier than U.S. competitors and has been willing to experiment with routes and so far has turned up with more successes than failures in the past few years, a contrast to pre-pandemic adventures such as secondary Chinese cities that haven’t restarted. MileagePlus members will have something to get excited about if the airline announces Bangkok in October.
Some airline will score with a nonstop from Los Angeles to Bangkok using a fuel efficient airplane. I flew once or twice on Thai Airways nonstop and liked the service but the cost was a bit higher than connecting flights between those places. Maybe an airline could try offering a third checked bag included for a somewhat higher price with the understanding that many would not take advantage of it or maybe only use it on the BKK to LAX segments which are jet stream assisted and usually less crowded.
I have to tell you, united airlines is really ahead of the competition. When you see them compared to Delta and American, you can see how United’s dedication to Asia and Europe led for United to be profitable. While American is focusing on Tokyo and Delta is focusing more on Seoul, you can see how United is really creative with their routes. Their product has recently led for them to become a more realistic competitor for Delta. With United retiring their 757 and delta not retiring it, you can see how United wants to further more focus on their customers rather than not care about the customers and be as profitable as they can be. This may lead for loyal members from Delta and American to overall switch to United because of their extensive network. You can see how United wants to earn the title for the best USA airline, with their increased offerings in IFE for mostly their entire fleet and how United has stepped up the game with their food, you can see how United wants to become America’s preferred airline. With delta suffering during the CrowdStrike, I think it has led for more people to switch to other airlines, such as United and JetBlue, leading for those airlines to become profitable. With delta’s food quality in decline, in which their sky club is the worst out of the other 2 major USA airlines, you can see how United is highly investing in their customers and offering a more competitive product. When comparing deltas 737, 757, 767, I can say United has the better overall product and is directly more competitive. With delta being the so called “premium” airline, I think it has led for some people to become brainwashed and think delta is a great airline, when it is not. All delta cares about is on time performance and nothing else. I want to see Timmy Dunn reply to my comment and brag about how delta is increasing their offerings in Asia, which is false and that united airlines has the better overall offering. I want to see Timmy establish false statistics. I bet he thinks that Delta is a premium airline, when it is not. Well, I guess I will end it here for now.
It’s a very different reality today than it was when UA ended BKK .. and TG also closed up all the US services.
Fuel is different and perhaps lost importantly, the aircraft today can operate those types of legs at a much more cost effective CASM than what the A345s, 772/3 and 744s could back when …
The only thing that gives me pause over a return to BKK is that UA already has exceptional connectivity via *A partners BR via TPE, OZ via ICN, NH via HND, and even CA via PEK just to name the most obvious – all of which can be non-stop via SFO… and I don’t see them going back to the 5th freedom flights of the early 2000s like NRT-SIN/BKK either by widebody or narrow body fleet.
Just as a curve ball – what about DPS (Denpasar/Bali)? That to me might be a place they could stake out first claim by a US carrier
Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service. Please be direct Guam service.
Hey, I can dream can’t I?
so he is just guessing.
UA might add a few more routes but they have covered as much of the major Asia/Pacific markets as their fleet and the market will support.
Their disastrous expansion into Asia and the S. Pacific shows they are having to work harder and harder to grow to find markets and are still not finding enough opportunities.
“used to serve places like Singapore, Seoul and Hong Kong from Hong Kong”
Interesting. Wonder what the load factors were for Hong Kong to Hong Kong.
@ Gary — UA nonstop SFO or LAX to BKK would be awesome!
If this does happen, it would be a relief for me. Just personal preference, I try to avoid NH at all cost. Since UA has joint venture with NH, it is unavoidable. I don’t know where Gary got this news, but hopefully, it will happen soon.
It’s crazy that none of the US airlines have non stop too Bangkok. A large number of Americans travel to BKK. Emirates has 35 flights a day from DXB to BKK.
However Polaris business class is the worst among other airlines serving this route fun your USA via their hubs. I fly EVA Starlux JAL Korean and SIA and they are all better then United.
BKK would be a logical addition to UA’s network, but not a very sustainable one. Lots of low yield and VFR and tourism, and not much corporate travel. UA’s expansion into Oceania the last two years fell flat, notably at LAX. Reality is that demand across the Pacific is fairly strong to Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, but a lot less so elsewhere. UA’s network is big, and probably too large for the market right now, and a lot of service offered now is workarounds given Russia overfly restrictions, like LAX-HKG which, supposedly goes 2 x daily soon but likely won’t last. I see UA adding a few more TATL leisure routes (perhaps they will revive the planned but never started EWR-PMO, or add some new things from DEN seasonally, like CDG, FCO). I don’t see IAH getting much love.
@Tim, they are getting their next wave of 787s in a couple of months no? And with the reduction in Australia, NZ and Amman. It sure seems like their fleet can support more Asia flying. I wish you’d do some reading before you comment sometimes. As far as market goes, MNL is one of their highest yielding routes. Some direct flights to Thailand or Malaysia might have high yields too.
It certainly seems that UA is the US airline of choice for international travelers versus domestic. (which is me).
BKK is a great destination: My wife and I stayed at the Shangri-La and had a huge boat to ourselves for a royal palace and barge tour. A delightful city with surprisingly nice parks if not equal to HKG. Predatory taxi drivers, though…
The best thing I can say for UA is they fly to CEB. One of my favorite destinations.
definitely imprinting SE Asia.
I flew United to Bankok through Narita on numerous occasions so I’d be happy to see service there return. That said, I’m still dreaming of the day United resurrects their flight from Guam to Cairns! That flight was always my preferred gateway to Australia!
Andy,
UA is supposed to get FOUR 787s this year which is way down from what they expected.
Anything is a guess with Boeing… .UA should get another bunch in 2025 but the outcome is far from certain.
And you made my point precisely. UA is simply shuffling the deck of its international network – amid cancellations of existing routes, they can add more. AMM is not likely to come back… TLV will be a fraction of what it was until the Middle East is stable again which could be a long time.
UA cancelled a bunch of underperforming flights to the S. Pacific that didn’t do well when they were added before.
UA has international aircraft they need to retire or they will spend money on costly overhauls just to keep older generation less fuel efficient aircraft in service.
DL is retiring some 767s; UA needs to do the same with some 767s and 777s.
UA is focused on keeping its large fleet; DL is growing and retiring older aircraft because it is receiving so many more new aircraft.
So, yes, UA has a few planes to use for expansion but only because it keeps an older, less fuel efficient fleet and also because it is cancelling other routes.
I know of exactly what I speak
How does anyone know yields anymore these days? Lately, people say business travel is gone, and low-cost airlines have turned premium. It is anyone’s game, as far as I can see. The flight restrictions and airline alliances are changing, like Lufthansa buying airlines to build their fortress. It is an interesting time in aviation; it seems to be “Show me the money”, and I will fly there.
All Tim Dunn does is hate on United whenever new routes or expansion happens. Let Delta announce another flight cancellation to Germany because they couldn’t make a basic route work and he will have every excuse in the book for it. You’re so pathetic
What 737 has the range to do 7h 30m TYO-BKK flights in the winter?
just saying,
nobody is hating on anything
You don’t want the basic facts.
You and others want to make it sound like Delta is failing in Germany when it served more cities than any other US airline and also just “loaned” a few flights from DTW-MUC to JFK and then returned them
In contrast, UA substantially pulled back its massive Asia-Pacific expansion of last winter; some stuff stuck for sure.
And UA might add a few more cities but it will be harder and harder for them to keep growing in Asia in part because of the range of the 787 and Russian airspace restrictions and partly because UA is focusing on bulking up the west coast.
In contrast, DL is building its route system from hubs throughout the US – as evidenced by its SLC-ICN route.
I will be happy to cheer whatever additions UA makes but I will keep it in perspective – both in terms of the focus on the west coast and also that it will come as they pull down other routes.
And, remember, we haven’t heard from UA about its 2025 transatlantic plans while AA and DL have announced so far – both heavily focused on southern Europe.
Aw, Timbits is SEW JELLY!!!!1!!1! of UA actually having the fleet capability to dominate TransPac while all his beloved, disgusting Delta can do is make trips to and from Seoul. And, yeah, let’s remind him of this fact: UA has wi-fi on those flights all the way. DL does not. And UA’s wi-fi is only set to improve with Starlink coming in. Wi-fi across the entire Pacific? That’s the sign of a premium airline.
I think SFO-BKK makes sense for them with current aircraft, and with the fact that they’ve pulled down their China, Israel, and Jordan flying. Air Canada seems to be pretty successful with their YVR-BKK service (it increased frequency iirc), and United has a strong hub at SFO.
I fly UA a lots, it’s my first choice ! Because I’m from Thailand, and disappointed when UA told me in 2014 that they cancelled NRT-BKK route, to my surprised and even to all the UA’s Pilot that fly this route- they all said every flights were full flight ! It doesn’t make any sense’s ! Ok, I can start flying UA again ! Thank you.
Delta did briefly serve Ho Chi Minh City from Narita with 757’s shortly after the NWA merger.
great to have direct flight from ewr to bkk
@wpcoe I distinctly remember flying NRT-BOM in a NH All-Business 737 several times
Doesn’t UA have a joint venture with NH to serve BKK-NRT? I’d think UA would rather support NH on the route instead of flying fifth freedom. I reckon UA would be willing to make a go of seasonally flying BKK-SFO nonstop. While corporate travel might not be there I’d bet they would find enough people willing to pay for premium leisure travel to make the route worthwhile a few days a week.
YVR-BKK is a seasonal route with AC. Why can’t UA make a seasonal commitment from SFO or LAX?
Thailand is not FAA category 1 certified, so zero chance for BKK nonstop from the US. If Thailand wanted to make that investment, it would be for Thai Airways to launch flights, not United.
@Mantis – Thailand says they expect cat 1 this year, perhaps United knows something about the timing of an announcement!
In any case, U.S. airlines start routes to category 2 countries all the time. Remember that Mexico spent much of the pandemic as category 2, but U.S. carriers launched Mexico routes like crazy.
ORD troll,
Nobody is jealous of United. You, like so many UA fanchildren, are full of arrogance and tout all of the things that are secondary for a business while missing the boat on the primary issues.
First, DL has over 600 aircraft with free high speed WiFi including growing portions of its transatlantic networi. UA has precisely ZERO. As with every other strategy, UA has watched DL and learned that high speed free WiFI makes sense. UA is YEARS away from having high speed global WiFi across its fleet. DL will have it within a year including across the Pacific- before UA’s first revenue flight with StarLink takes off.
Second,
it is laughable that you talk about a fleet advantage for UA when anyone with half a brain knows that the A350 in its most recent versions can fly more passengers further than any 787 or 777.
UA has nearly 100 777s left in its fleet and DL’s transpacific fleet – which is composed entirely of new generation aircraft except for HNL=HND – is 20-25% more fuel efficient than UA’s 777s – either version – which operate larger chunks of UA’s TPAC network. Fuel efficiency matters most on long routes and UA is clinging to its old aircraft for the sake of size. And doing so costs them hundreds of millions of dollars per year extra just over the Pacific.
Third, feel free to mock ICN but it is and always will be a better TPAC connecting hub than either NRT or HND and S. Korea made the wise decision to require nearly all international flights to use ICN while Japan is splitting international flights between NRT and HND. NRT is an economically failing hub and HND is heavily a domestic airport. There is no plan to open HND to even more US flights and no one is adding NRT flights; UA tried to move its IAH-NRT flight to HND but failed. NRT is a failing hub; Tokyo is a no-growth market. In contrast, there is and will continue to be growth at ICN.
Fourth, DL was the largest airline across the Pacific right after it acquired NW and realized the intra-Asia operation didn’t work. And then HND opened to US carrier flights. Post pandemic, DL is regrowing its international network and is earning 1.8 times more per seat mile flying the Pacific than United. United and its fankids love to talk about size but never addresses why it underperforms a smaller competitor to Asia.
Fifth,
DL will keep growing in Asia and do so from more of the US than UA. It is simply a matter of Asian JV partner strength and aircraft performance. UA is by far the largest US airline from California. Period. DL has more flights to E. Asia from the other 49 states.
Finally, UA and DL and every other airline is first and foremost for-profit companies. When UA passes DL on a year round basis in profitability including on a seat mile basis, then you will have something to crow about.
Until then, enjoy the few fleeting points of pride that you can have about United.
Tim
You fail to realize that most of us here don’t have the sort of unconsummated crush on UA or AA that you have on Delta.
My main problem with Delta is it’s 550K biz class redemptions.
@ Jon F — I recently ran a DL search ATL-JNB roundtrip nonstop, and the mileage price was 990,000 miles roundtrip before 15%OFF. What a joke.
@ Tim — Why do you think we care about fuel effieicncy? Not my problem. Bottom line is, United kicks DL’s rear on TPAC service, and you are jealous.
Tim, United’s “disastrous” expansion in Asia? lol
As Andrew Nocella pointed out recently, UA has more lie-flat seats than DL and AA combined, allowing them to be a much more international carrier than their competitors, while DL can’t even make business-heavy markets from NYC to Japan and Germany work.
@Gary
Mexico is a much different scenario. Direct flights to BKK doesn’t happen without codeshare with Thai Airways, which can’t happen without Cat1. JonNYC thinks SGN, which seems more plausible.
I hope you’re right though, I’d love to see SFO-BKK, which would be the most plausible as it’s shorter flight than LAX and a United hub…although there would be next to zero J award availability.
Wow, this is surprising to me. Wasn’t expecting a US carrier to possibly offer non-stop service to Bangkok anytime soon. What I find strange is how Thailand supposedly has FAA tier 2 aviation standards but India is at tier 1? That doesn’t make any sense. THAI is definitely a better airline than Air India and if you’ve ever been to India and Thailand, you’ll know the latter has better, more efficient and more modern airports. This FAA tier rating system smells of political bias, which probably has something to do with the 2014 Thai military coup, rather than actual lower safety ratings. After all, THAI flies to Australia, which surely has equivalent, if not higher aviation safety standards than the USA. I mean, we are talking about a country [Australia] that has some of the strictest enforced transportation safety rules in the world (both on the ground and in the air) and THAI Airways safety record is as good as any comparable Asian or Oceanic carrier.
Mark,
since UA has a larger widebody fleet, of course they have more lie flat seats.
The problem is that you – and Scott Kirby – are focused on statistics that only show UA at the top of the list – and to the exclusion of data that actually matters to business and the industry.
DL was $2 billion more profitable than UA in 2023; that number will probably shrink this year but UA is a substantially less profitable airline than DL. And those of you that don’t want to hear about profits should read Gary’s article about dirty United planes. UA isn’t run by idiots. They know their job is to make money and they will cut costs if they can’t get the revenue – and UA is not succeeding on the bottom line.
The number of lie flat seats doesn’t change the fact that UA through a bunch of capacity into the Pacific exactly one year ago and ended up pulling several routes while having multiple markets with load factors well below their own average. Yes, it was disastrous and the type of seats on the plane then or now doesn’t change that reality
Fuel efficiency DOES matter – because it is a cost. UA cannot price high enough to offset its costs when Asian airlines have much lower labor costs AND typically newer aircraft. DL can’t change the labor cost thing – it is a US airline also – but it can cut fuel costs by using modern new generation aircraft on its longest flights – to Asia. Saving $15k – 25,000 each way on a transpacific flight adds up to a whole lot of money.
And UA simply does not have a better hard product across its network. UA JUST NOW decided to start adding free global WIFI and its fan kiddos are acting like it is installed; DL has over 600 mainline fleet with free global high speed WiFi right now and will be through with its entire mainline fleet by the time UA flies its first flight with StarLink.
DL has AVOD on all of its mainline fleet (or will by next summer including all of the used aircraft) except for the 717s. UA will be nowhere close.
Polaris wasn’t class leading at the time it was introduced; it is even more dated now. AA’s new business class product will be more advanced than Polaris – not to speak of scores of DL widebodies with Delta One Suites.
Scott Kirby has said that Delta is his north star. He reads all of the annual reports and listens to all of the earnings calls – and his strategies are copied from Delta.
If they add that route, let’s hope their inflight food & service is much better than what they have
on their longest flight in their system, SFO to SIN. We took it once in bus. class and were very disappointed; they need to enhance that service on such a long flight.
As someone from outside the US who is now based in the US and who has flown on all the main carriers here multiple times (except WN which I’ve only flown twice and was underwhelmed both times) it’s still amusing the battle in these threads on who is best. None of them are that good – they are all much of a muchness with a few things slightly better on one vs another. There’s a reason none of the US airlines ever make it in the top 10 (or even 20 sometimes) of all the various airline rankings that come out which are always dominated by Asia, ME and a handful of European/Oceania carriers. Flying them compared to what is available here is night and day. I really don’t get this idea that Delta (or UA) are in any way premium – they’re not. Even ULCC easyJet has somehow managed a 4* Skytrax rating yet Delta does not (maybe they paid a backhander lol).