BWOOD From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 32 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 21 hours ago) and read 8284 times:
I was wondering if anyone knew if any U.S. air carriers were interested in purchasing the new 777-300ERs. It seems to me that there should be a need or possible market for them to replace older 747s or even older 777s for United, American or even Delta. It could also fill in for older 767s. I know that money is very tight for U.S. airlines but it would seem to me that it could pay off in the long run with fewer airplanes in the fleet that can carry more people longer distances. It could even open up new 777 routes from the U.S. such as Australia, and Asia. Just looking for info and your opinions.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12788 posts, RR: 17
Reply 4, posted (11 years 20 hours ago) and read 8042 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Right now no USA carrier is in tip top condition to start spending big sums of money on new planes. Airlines that fly to high density airports like LHR, NRT etc would most likly be able to fill the B773s.
Cloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 18 hours ago) and read 7875 times:
All of the above comments regarding aircraft size are true.
It is also possible that extreme range may not be as valuable for US airlines. All of Europe and most of Asia can be reached non-stop from the US mainland by B-market aircraft. In addition to this, some US airlines operate flights between Chinese and Japanese cities and the rest of Asia or rely on code share partners to do the same. It is true that there are a few cities (most notably Singapore) that do require high nonstop range to reach. But Singapore airlines gets most of North America and Europe as a reward for going that distance. The US just gets Singapore, Thailand, a few Australian cities, and perhaps parts of Central Asia(Pakistan, India, etc.). Why invest in a new aircraft type when you can go from China or Japan instead? US airlines also have easy access to Hawai and a lot of domestic trafic to and from the Islands. Some flights that would have used extreme range aircraft stop in Honolulu instead.
Notice that the A340 (whose range is its main selling point) did not do very well in the US either. There are a few routes where a US airline could make money from ultralonghaul aircraft like the A340NG's and 777NG's. But there arn't enough of them and they are not big enough to make it worth the money. It is easier to codeshare.
IN SHORT.... The US is more centrally located (if one can use that term on a global scale) then most other industrialized regions. You gain a lot more from extreme range if your airline is based in the South Pacific rim, in a country like Thailand, Singapore or Australia. South Asia and parts of The Middle East are also pretty far away from many highly populous and industrialized places. That is why most (if not all?) of the extreme range planes being bought are being bought by airlines in these regions.
Carpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 3021 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (11 years 16 hours ago) and read 7697 times:
Since when is there a 777NG?
Variants for the 777 are 772, 772ER, 772LR, 773, & 773ER with tweaking of gross-weights for each variant.
The current despressed state of the legacy carrier industry in the US, it is a huge dream to just think about a 773ER in a US carrier color scheme in the short-term. Who knows in the medium/long-term. It's anything but a WAG right now.
DeltaWings From Switzerland, joined Aug 2004, 1294 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 hours ago) and read 7208 times:
notice there are not even that many 747s in the US either, exept for UA and NW (does CO still have their 742s?). I think the 777-300 would have a better chance in the US, compared to the 773ER, since there are also many 747 mainline flights (see UA)
Homer: Marge, it takes two to lie. One to lie and one to listen.
American 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4504 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (11 years 10 hours ago) and read 7119 times:
No DeltaWings, Contiental no longer operates the Boeing 747 aircraft. They retired their last Classic 747 four or five years ago and they have never ordered any 400 Series, nor they picked up any second hand ones from other carriers.
I don't see a 777-300 with a US carrier because the airlines in the United States don't need such a high capacity aircraft on domestic routes or routes to Alaska, Guam and Honolulu. Yes, Northwest may still operate the 747-200 on routes to Honolulu and maybe Guam (I don't know if NW flies there, I know CO does) but they are not interested in any variant of the 777. United is still in Chapter 11 and they have parked quite a few 747-400's which weren't that old, so it doesn't surprise me they don't order the 777-300. The only US carrier that could order the 777-300ER is Continental, because the 777's they currently have are GE powered and since they work with Air France they could have Air France do the maintenance of their 773ER's and vice versa.
Usairways16bwi From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1004 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 hours ago) and read 6941 times:
i also find it strange that U.S carriers dont operate the 773ER.
- AA may be happy with their 772's, but i think they could benifit from the 773ER's to use for the east coast-asia and maybe australia flights.
- i dont think UA needs them because they have the 772's and the 744's.
-as for CO, i dont know how well thay are doing on the european flights, but if its going well, maybe they could use a few 773ER's to increase loads.
N1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 28236 posts, RR: 74
Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 hours ago) and read 6895 times:
AA has said they don't want to take the risk of not filling a 747, any 747, and the 773ER is almost as big as a 741 (look at the number of seats that airlines actually put in them, not what Boeing says). I would think this would mean less interest. Also, they run Trents on their 772ERs, and they are not available on the 773ER.
CO is an airline that would have a good case for picking the 773ER up. They are in a much better financial position (though not great), their 772ERs are GE-90 powered, they have a shortage of widebodies, and they are flying some routes that are both weight restricted and under capacity (EWR-HKG, GUM-HNL-LAX). Depending on the price, they really could use the plane. BA is also a good airline for the 773ER (they have some GE-90 craft, though they prefer the Trent ones) but not as a 744 replacement as some people think. The 744 still holds more people and has more practical range, but the 773ER could be a good high density plane for leisure routes that used to fly with 741s and 742s.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
COEWR2587 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 607 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (11 years 4 hours ago) and read 6377 times:
Don't people seem to get it? U.S. aren't are high at filling widebodies to capacity domestically like Asia or Europe can. I can't think of any U.S. airline, except UA as a 747 replacement, that would be useful to have.
Thrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2691 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (11 years 3 hours ago) and read 6285 times:
The 773ER is simply too big and too expensive a jet right now for most U.S. carriers. Getting a full payload will prove to be a tremendous task on a regular basis. Also, UA will not likely purchase the 773ER since they are so low on cash right now, and there is also the problem of engine commonality. They appear perfectly satisfied with their 744s. Boeing needs to figure out a way to lower the prices of their aircraft without losing stock in my opinion if they expect to generate more sales.
Sv11 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 163 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 12 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5498 times:
Is NWA planning to replace its 747-200s? Looking at their fleet http://ir.nwa.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=111021&p=irol-fleet, they have a sizable fleet of -200 passenger and freighter aircraft. I was thinking they might replace them with used 744s but I believe not many are available now. Maybe they might order some 777-300ER and convert some 744s to freighters.
EddieDude From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7832 posts, RR: 42
Reply 19, posted (10 years 12 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4908 times:
Maybe because service level in flights operated by the European carriers is notably higher than on their American counterparts' and therefore there is more demand for BA, LH, AF, etc. flights than for legacy carriers' flights. Maybe because European passengers yield better margins than American pax (because Americans upgrade more or redeem their miles to fly more than Europeans do). Maybe because European carriers can also fly these big planes to other places like Canada, Latin America, Asia and Africa, whereas the American carriers do not need 747's or 773's to fly to Latin America, they don't fly to Africa, and they have a smaller presence in Asia than European carriers (this means that European airlines can use these aircraft to more destinations more often, all year round). Or maybe it is simpler than that and it is just that given their financial situation, they just can't afford to get brand new 773's while European carriers are doing better financially.
I really don't know. Your point is very good and I tend to share it. These are only ideas that come to my mind right now but I may be really wrong so please be gentle.
Next flights: MEX-AMS KL 74M | AMS-PRG KL E90 | PRG-CDG AF A320 | CDG-MEX AM 788
Checo77 From Peru, joined Oct 2004, 1345 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (10 years 12 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4605 times:
I think I would be a pretty good decision, as you say, US carrier may use fewer airplanes and transport more people. I think, since Delta its in trouble, they should od it. After all, the 777 is one of the best best aiplanes availables in the market and customer would be very happy to fly a 777. I would.
FA4UA From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 812 posts, RR: 19
Reply 22, posted (10 years 12 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4271 times:
A recent USA Today article (a couple months ago) described the difference between the 744 and the 772 in laymen's terms... albeit not all totally accurate on every fact. One number that really stood out was that the average 744 cost an additional $3,000 an hour to operate compared with the 772 when one examines fuel burn, staffing costs, maintenance, etc etc.
I would love the same comparison 773ER vs. 744.
It really is a shame that Boeing had to have that exclusivity contract with GE for the engines on the 773ER!
my two cents...
The debate continues... Starwood or Hyatt... which is better