Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Jet Blue Originally Wanted 737NGs...  
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16866 posts, RR: 51
Posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2672 times:

But Airbus virtually gave them (A-320s) away, however maintenance costs and man hours would have been lower with the 737NG (so says B6's techs).

Also another great Gordon'ism from Gordon Bethune on B6,
"Most of these guys are smoking ragweed"  Smokin cool

http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_om_story.jsp?id=news/om1202JBlu.xml


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
45 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUps763 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2637 times:

A 738 with winglets would have looked sharp in the JetBlue scheme.  Smile


matt


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2612 times:

I don't think Airbus gave those planes away. I think they did a better job selling it to Neeleman. Neeleman had no intention of buying A320s when he met with Airbus but Leahy pulled it off. I will find a link.

User currently offlineSccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5519 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2562 times:

"Gave" away can mean a lot of things. Airbus wanted a high-profile deal with JetBlue, recognized Neeleman as someone whose credentials granted instant credibility to the enterprise, and did what it took to make the deal work.

You can call that "giving planes away," or you can call it aggressive (and effective) marketing.

I prefer Boeings myself, but you can't help but admire a deal well-played, and this is one. As for me, I am looking forward evry much to seeing JetBlue's livery at DFW, preferably sooner than later.



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2541 times:

I agree. I also prefer Boeing across the board...but Airbus deserves credit for the JetBlue deal.

User currently offlineScottysAir From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2458 times:

What is deal with Jetblue wanted B737NG?? Why doesn't with Jetblue Airways for Boeing aircraft and nor want with airbus either. I am serious about with Boeing company at Jetblue? If Jetblue want made a credit for new B737-800 aircraft or probably will maybe not. Well, talk ya later!

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 6, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2377 times:

jetBlue will not switch aircraft at this point. As the article mentions, they are very happy with the aircraft and after the original training curve have found it to be a very maintenance friendly airplane.

They were comparing the costs of owning FBW vs non FBW aircraft primarily in the article, and there's no good comparison as the 777 is the only FBW Boeing presently made.

I didn't get from the article that they're unhappy with the plane at all.

N


User currently offlineMagyar From Hungary, joined Feb 2000, 599 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2361 times:


STT757 original post is a typical example of distorting
facts and a subjective interpretation of an article.
I happened to read the linked article, and the article
never mention anything like
''maintenance costs and man hours would have
been lower with the 737NG (so says B6's techs).''
The relevent sections of the article are:

>>
Extensive training also has helped the JetBlue
maintenance staff become comfortable with the Airbus
airplane itself. Many of the line technicians are New
York-born and -bred, and had an innate distrust of
the Airbus product compared to the made-in-the-USA
Boeing airplanes.
<<

and also

>>
"We were all Boeing guys; we didn't want Airbus,"
said Lopez. "Mechanics were afraid of Airbus (and all its)
new-generation stuff. But once you learn it, it is a maintenance-friendly plane."
<<

>>
"The burden of an A320 maintenance program is a little
higher than with a Boeing product," said Patel. "The
A320 is new to JetBlue, but not new to the industry. (Regarding) operator experience we're getting day in
and day out, yes, we have issues. Some are unresolved from Airbus; some have been around for a long time."
<<

As a matter of fact this ``maintenance burden'' of Jetblue
can also be read as an attitude problem from the personel.

Janos


User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 8, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2281 times:

I think what people dont look at is the real reason why Bethune doesnt believe in the end that Jetblue will be successful. They are brand new, and as a brand new company, all employees are at entry level salary (or there about), the planes are all brand new, and they are only flying routes that are high demand routes. As the years go on, people will want raises, unions may or may not get a bite into them, planes will need more maintenance and if Jetblue intends to grow, they will eventually have to start flying routes that are not as profitable as the cherry pickings they have at the moment. When salaries are in control, maintenance is reasonably low, debt repayments on planes are still at lower levels due to grace periods (some people think this means they have no aircraft payments, but according to reports, they still have payments, but at a better rate for the first few years or so), anyways, it is not difficult to make profit in this environment, but in a few years time this will change and they will struggle like the others. This is not to say they are not doing a great job, because they are, but they are evaluating a slightly unrealistic environment.

Jeremy


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 9, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2219 times:

I think over the next few years the economy will start a more aggressive upward curve, and will provide some offset for the factors you're mentioning.

They're starting and running a great airline at the worst time in history to do so. In a way, it can only get better.

*fingers crossed*

N


User currently offlineJcs17 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 8065 posts, RR: 38
Reply 10, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2181 times:

As for me, I am looking forward evry much to seeing JetBlue's livery at DFW, preferably sooner than later.

It doesnt look like we are in jetBlue's plans for at least the next 6 years. There was an article in the Morning News about how no low-fare carrier even wants to test the waters in Dallas in competion with AA because of the "predatory" tactics often used by the major carrier to drive smaller airlines out of the marketplace. What they were trying to say is, dont hold your breath.



America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
User currently offlineAerMickey From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 85 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2106 times:

Praise to thee of our father Gordon. Long live Boeing.

Mickey


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16866 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2078 times:

Magyar,

From your own quotes,

"Extensive training", "The burden of an A320 maintenance program is a little
higher than with a Boeing product"

Which translates into more training , more man hours spent reading about the plane then working on the plane. I don't know how to dumb it down further for you, maybe someone else could explain it to you better.

""The burden of an A320 maintenance program is a little
higher than with a Boeing product"

"additional training JetBlue puts in on the A320 helps it deal with the spurious faults common with digital aircraft"

""It's an airplane that has a lot of spurious faults, and you have to reset a lot of the avionics systems," said Lopez."

""If you get the training on the airplane it works out well, but you need the "MAXIMUM" amount of training on this airplane."

"Airbus responded to comments regarding spurious faults: "The degree of scrutiny (with digital aircraft such as the A320) may be higher than with purely mechanical systems, but it is not higher than the 777,"

No , but it's higher than the 737NG.

"Clyde Kizer, president and COO, Airbus North America Customer Services, who added that such faults are common with digital airplanes"

"JetBlue maintenance managers admit, however, that the fly-by-wire A320 has given them more maintenance challenges than they would have had with a mechanically driven 737. "

"The A320 is new to JetBlue, but not new to the industry. (Regarding) operator experience we're getting day in and day out, yes, we have issues. Some are unresolved from Airbus; some have been around for a long time."

" There also are "constant electrical problems,"

"because of the (maintenance) challenges with the airplane"









Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2051 times:

In 1995, United Airlines stock traded near $100 and people hailed the employee buyout as a big success. Eight years later, United is in the toilet. JetBlue will come down to earth as its planes age, its employees will become crusty and want more, and the model will begin to crack. For now, it is a great airline, but like everything else that goes up, it eventually will have to come down.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 14, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2045 times:

I'm sure the 737NG is not perfect, and in many ways its a far inferior plane especially in terms of takeoff performance, range, and cargo.

As the article itself said, once they got used to it, its a very maintenance friendly plane.

It also admitted right off that they were a bunch of Boeing bigots from the get-go, and that they've all grown to like the plane.

Its a balance. They like them. They neither hate them nor love them. It took some more training time, but now its a very maintenance friendly aircraft.

N


User currently offlineMagyar From Hungary, joined Feb 2000, 599 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2029 times:


Look STT757, I am not going to argue about whether
the A320 or B737NG is cheaper to maintain without
facts.

All what I am saying is that you subjectively
interpreted the text and wrote it as fact.

Anyone is welcomed to read the link and form
his/her opinion. As I understood the maintenance
problems stem from the initial ``Boeing culture``
of the staff and from the unfamiliarity with the A320.
Yes, this may increase the cost in the beginning,
but does not necessary means that on the long run
(when the initial unfamiliarity and hick-ups are
worked out) the maintenance costs and man hours would
be lower with the 737NG.

Janos
PS:


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16866 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2010 times:

Everything on Airliners.net is subjective, no one here is expecting their posts to be taken as fact or to be published.

So don't go jumping onto my posts dis-crediting me, Im reacting to the article "I" posted. If you have a different reaction than by all means "share your feelings with the group", otherwise keep it to yourself.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8017 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1976 times:

I think at the time B6 was being formed, Boeing was running its Renton, WA plant at full capacity just trying to keep up with 737NG demand from other airlines (this was around 1997-1998). No wonder why B6 had to ask Airbus for A320's.

User currently offlineSkiordie From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1960 times:

The choice of Airbus planes for Jetblue had included a lot of marketing factors that supported the entire Jetblue marketing effort.

Not only was the airline new, the planes were, so new most people never flew in Airbus planes with pvt's. Jetblue advertisements, the few, emphasized the newness of everything they were doing, the pricing, service, comfort and oh yeah the planes, did I mention how new the planes are.

As a NYer, I can tell you that anything new is worth trying. You were treated to a fimilar, but sleaker, check-in and boarding. The planes were so new that most of the people I was checking out were playing with the pvt instead of looking out the window at the skyline of New York! Compare this treatment with a flight out of Islip on Southwest 737's, NY only other lost carrier, give Jetblue a awsume head start in it's home market. ( I hope I can say that with pride)

We can all argue that airlines are just selling transportation. Basicly that's it, but how we spend time traveling and how we treat ourselves, transport ourselves makes each of us different and each airline different. Each business has to define how it product is different that others. If it means that you use specific equipment, pricing or service that's how they will do it.

I enjoy the threads that I follow here on airliner.net. Some times I want to add my 10 cents.

Thanks for listening
Skiordie


User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1897 times:

"They are flying only high-demand routes" - Bethune.

This is the classic complaint of established players in deregulated industries. The new entrent will "skim the cream" and let us poor old boys deal with low demand areas. You hear this prattle from the big boys in industries as diverse as telecommunication and public schooling.

I don't know if this is true with JetBlue, as I have not done the proper analysis. But with WN and the other Lo-co's do tend to do fly more on denser routes. The reason for this however, is NOT because the lo-co's are skiming the cream. It is because the lo-co's CREATED that traffic in the first place. Most of WN's biggest markets did not exist or where significantly smaller than when they first came. The "cream skimming" accusation is like watching someone build a huge mall on ground you sold to him cheap because you thought it was unprofitable to build there. Then, watching that mall succeed beyond your worst nightmares, you complain because he allegedly is stealing mall traffic from your own stores.

One classic case is in Long Beach. Few carred about Long Beach untill Jet Blue came in. Then Jet Blue comes and makes it a big market. Then other airliners, particularily American, have the gall to complain about being "shut out" of that market. Let someone else take the risks, manage his business well, and then say it is unfair that you're sorry A-- doesnt have YOUR fair share of what HE built. This is a strange definition of fairness. Don't know much about the other industries, but the "skimming the cream complaint" sounds like a load of BS to me when used in the airline industry.

Those who think low-co's are bad for small cities and routes, etc. should go to Spokane or upstate New York. Or Jackson, Miss. Or Bloomington, ILL. Or Wichita. Or South Padre. Or, on the other end of the scale, Baltimore, MDW, or Newark. There are many, many other places that have much more traffic than they used to because a lo-co entered the market. In fact, there are to many to list, even if you exclude WN.

Bethune's point about wage and union growth is a good one, however. Hopefully, by the time these costs begin to bite JetBlue, it will be big enough to enjoy some economies of scale that will offset these new costs.


User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 20, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1885 times:

"They are flying only high-demand routes" - Bethune.

Cloudy, does he also mention why his own company (or another major) didn't pick up those routes before Jetblue came along and snapped them?
If the major airlines didn't saturate the high demand routes they only have themselves to blame when upstarts find an opening there to enter the market.

Check Europe, where airlines like Rynair have to resort to trickery to make it seem they're flying to major destinations by distorting the names of airports (Frankfurt-Hahn for example, is 100km from Frankfurt...) because the large airports are filled to capacity by the large national carriers.

United (and the others) thought they could raise prices forever by deliberately serving destinations with less seats than there was a market for. Now someone's stepped in and filled that void...



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineCapt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1864 times:

Jwenting

No airlines in Europe resort to 'trickery'. Airlines such as FR (Ryanair) clearly state on their website, the details of the airports which they use (location, maps, distances to the nearest major city or town, transport links etc.)

The reasons they use such airports are well-known...it saves them many $$$ in costs in all sorts of areas, as well as saving time on turnarounds, incentives, congestion etc.

Using major airports would probably eventually kill off the Ryanair model. Easyjet's policy of using costly major airports in Europe is already causing it a number of problems (increasing costs and lower load factors, which are essential isuues for a LCC).

Added to that, is the fact that the airport code is included, as is the regional name of the airport, at the time of booking and on all advertising posters i.e. Bologna-Forli, Oslo-Torp, London-Stansted.

The information is all there to make an informed decision, so I am afraid you are going to have to ditch this part of your argument above. No trickery on the part of Ryanair, or other LCCs, most probably due to legal obligations.



User currently offlineA320FO From Austria, joined Oct 2000, 211 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1832 times:

@ Capt.Picard
Considering the number of cases at certain courts, a lot of the European low-cost outfits are pushing it to the edge, yes, and some do use "tricks" and have to be called back by the judge. Ryanair with MOL certainly is a very hot candidate on this list.
By the way, if they fly to some out-of-the-way provincial airport, FR does try to disguise it as far as possible. They don't use Frankfurt-Hahn, they write it FRANKFURT-Hahn (-Hahn also is written in the smallest possible font, something the HTML code doesn't support).


User currently offlineCapt.Picard From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 1805 times:

Sorry A320FO,

I am not concerned with court cases, I am merely concerned with the contention that these airlines some how 'trick' their customers.

You are assuming the customer is an idiot. (I can understand that, there are plenty of idiotic people in our world).

I cannot agree that Ryanair tries to 'hide' anything. It's plain to see, when making your booking, which airport you will be using. If you can't be bothered to spare a few seconds to check, that is your problem, not the airline's. All the necessary info is clear and legible on the internet and in the adverts.

Judging by the success of the airline, I would guess a significant number of people are quite happy with the airports Ryanair serve (some of which are the main airports anyway).



User currently offlineUdo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 8 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 1758 times:

 Yawn Yawn Yawn Gordon's comment is once more an example that he is just jealous at several competitors and pissed off when other airlines are successful as well. And if these other successful airlines additionally operate Airbus he is pissed off even more...remember his comments about the A380? Well, his airline will never be able to operate that magnificent aircraft, from 2006 his airline will be in the shade of others like Qantas, Singapore Als, Emirates, Lufthansa, Air France, Virgin or others...what can he do? Yes, talking bad about the product to save his company's image.
The same now with jetBlue. They are growing fast and their loyal customers are increasing every day. What to do for Gordon to make sure his airline remains in the people's heads? Yes, talking bad about them.

As I already said some time ago: before talking crap about other airlines and other products he will never be able to purchase, he should shut up and take care about his prestigious ERJ145 jungle jet network and think about which cities in North Western Kansas he can connect with cities in South Eastern Indiana...  Laugh out loud


Regards
Udo


25 STT757 : UDO, Of all those airlines you posted CO is the largest, who's in whos shadow? The US carriers aren't screaming bloody murder to fly European domestic
26 N79969 : Udo, Gordon does not run a "jungle-jet" network anywhere. It is now a separate company. STT757 is right, Europeans salivate at the prospect of flying
27 Donder10 : US airlines already have the access to the EU market don't they?
28 Udo : On the paper, ExpressJet and Continental are separate companies, but they're both adding their services together to a single CO brand. And Gordon as C
29 STT757 : UDO, You cannot use just International passengers as a measurement of an airlines "status", when flying across Europe one would cross a border every c
30 N79969 : I'm sure Gordon's EWR-HNL flights exceeds any international flight in Europe by a lot. The A380 is not a signficant innovation technologically...it's
31 Greg : One comment, one observation: The 737NG's and their respective 32X counterparts are, for all purposes, equal in operating cost. You can argue whether
32 Udo : I don’t want to get into an endless off topic discussion, but there are some points to add. 1. Inter-national doesn’t not only mean ‘distance’
33 STT757 : " you want to you can even leave out the EU for them, which is comparable to the US in size " Which EU are you talking about, the European Union might
34 STT757 : One of the busiest (if not the busiest) routes in the US is between NY and LA, a distance of some 2,600 miles. The most heavily traveled routes in the
35 Post contains images Gigneil : NYC-SFO isn't the calmest route, either, and its 2586 miles. JFK-LAX is 2474 miles. A long way compared to intra-EU travel. N
36 GKirk : Perhaps jetBlue found something better in the A320 *shock* than the 737NG...ever thought of that? BTW...Why are a lot of Americans against Airbus a/c?
37 Post contains images Gigneil : I'm all for Airbus, and I don't think the traveling public minds them either. It really comes down to the seating on the planes in terms of what the p
38 Post contains links and images STT757 : Actually both CO and DL have operated Airbus aircraft, DL was not pleased with the A-310s and went with more 767s. And AA currently operates a fleet o
39 STT757 : The biggest problem most Americans have with Airbus is that it was "created" by European Gov'ts, while Boeing was created by individual citizens and a
40 Gigneil : I think its safe to argue that both Boeing and Douglas were created, directly or indirectly, by the US Military, and directly controlled by them in th
41 Post contains links STT757 : Actually Boeing's first sale was not a military sale, but a international sale to a New Zealand flying school. http://boeing.com/companyoffices/histor
42 Post contains images 727_Gal : whoa... way off topic here, people! I think B6 is perfectly content with their A320s now. It sounds, from the article, that they were scared of the un
43 Magyar : >> The biggest problem most Americans have with Airbus is that it was "created" by European Gov'ts, while Boeing was created by individual citizens an
44 Udo : Oh my god, should we all give a big sorry that evil Airbus took away market share? I guess some people would love to see a Boeing monopoly...the quest
45 Cloudy : Jwenting, Read the whole post before commenting on it. I make virtually the same points as you, yet you seem to think I'm agreeing with Bethune. As to
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Jet Blue Arrives At SWF! posted Tue Dec 19 2006 23:56:50 by AlitaliaMD11
Jet Blue Investor Day...anyone Listen? posted Tue Dec 5 2006 16:57:45 by MaverickM11
Is Jet Blue Coming To MKE? posted Thu Nov 30 2006 02:55:49 by Legacytravel
Jet Blue New Tucson Flight posted Tue Oct 17 2006 23:09:44 by Nycaross
Jet Blue Flight Diverted To MCO posted Wed Sep 20 2006 22:02:05 by United757
Jet Blue In Battle Creek, MI posted Sat Sep 16 2006 01:23:32 by Flyingbronco05
Jet Blue Bird Strike posted Sun Aug 27 2006 19:46:02 by Glydrflyr
Michael Eisner Got The Blues- Jet Blue(s) That Is posted Thu Aug 24 2006 04:24:11 by JerseyGuy
Jet Blue 1281? posted Sat Aug 5 2006 18:51:14 by TPAnx
Jet Blue To MIA? posted Thu Jun 29 2006 16:25:37 by AlitaliaMD11