AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1260 times:
Mr. Milton, the president of Air Canada, was in London attending a conference yesterday, and he made some interesting comments about fleet replacements which will be coming up at AC in the next few years. Read the story at http://www.canoe.com/AirMergers/mar30_aircanneedsplanes.html
The mention of all freight aircraft is rather interesting, don't you think? Also, after some comments on this forum previously putting the 728Jet as a possible F28 replacement, I find it also quite interesting that AC has grouped the DC9/737/146/F28 all together for replacement possibly even with a single aircraft type.
C-FTOD From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 849 times:
Sam 777 is right. AC won't even consider bringing in a new aircraft type at this point. We already have too much variety for operations to be fully economical. The A318 is a good bet, with more A319s coming. The interesting thing is what will happen this summer with the major route expansion. Last time AC had to return 3 L1011s from the desert. What will they do now?
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 841 times:
I agree the A318/319/320 family is a good bet, but I'm not willing to discard the 717's so very quickly. Why you might ask? Delivery times, weight, and cost being the big factors. And with 100 aircraft that's more than enough for good fleet economics even if it was split into 2 types with 50 of each. But there's something else. I just came across an old clipping from a Seattle newspaper from 2 years ago (can't find the website again, sorry, but I looked). It mentions AirBC and AirNova having selected the 717, and indeed AirBC signed LOI's for 5 firm/5 option and AirNova for 5 firm/9 options, pending modifications to AC's pilots contracts. Of course that didn't happen and ACPA's refusal meant that the issue was quietly forgotten, but I think that says that it's too quick to dump the 717 from the race.
CPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4744 posts, RR: 31 Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 833 times:
YWG777, that article mentioned that Air Canada was planning to get rid of their 747-400s and replace them with A340-500 and -600s. For cargo they are interested in purchasing 747-400, but not for pax service.
AC183 mentioned that is is very interesting that Milton wants to replace the DC9/737/F28/146 with a single aircraft. That is a very tough order to fill. The A318 and 717 are fine for the higher end of the spectrum, but too large for F28/146 routes.
I think that Lord Milton will have to back down from that requirement and do make his choice of these larger airplanes from this list (for about 70 airplanes)
1) A318 (pilot, airframe and engine fleet commonality)
2) 717-200 (lighter, probably more efficient than A318)
3) 737-600 (CFM56 engine commonality with A340/320/319)
4) BRJ-X (just on the drawing board but a good fit)
plus 30 CRJ-700s to replace the F28 and 146s.
If you have A318 running on F28 routes you are either losing money or cutting back service - lets hope Milton doesn't have to make that choice.
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4365 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 814 times:
I think that Airbus definately has the inside track on this particular order. Boeing can't be counted out though. AC's route system would be a perfect fit for the 717. It is just a better short hop aircraft than the A318 period. Cockpit commonality though tends to favor the A318. Delivery slots though are mighty hard to come by and in the past few months Boeing has been selling 737NGs like hot cakes. I really think though that it comes down to the 717 vs A318. The 717 is the better aircraft but commonality always seems to muddle up that arguement. I have said it before. If you purchase an inferior product because it its cheaper then pay the consequences in the future.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
Wingman From France, joined May 1999, 1704 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 814 times:
I think Boeing has no hope in this contest. Look to them to make an insane offer just to drive AC crazy and bargain down the Airbus offer till it's a money loser. I'd rather see Boeing take the order, but at least there's some small satisfaction in seeing the Airbus accounting folks go into cardiac arrest (again).
YMQ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 799 times:
There they go again....
CX747: i would really like to here about your credentials. You seem like an expert in airline management. Or maybe you work as an aerospace engineer???
And when the first one starts, the sidekick jumps in....What does make you so knowlegeable about Airbus finances dear Wingman? Would you happen to be an insider, as the consortium books are not open to the public eye?
You guys have the right to have the opinions you want. But do not try to pass these as definitive accounts, as they are nothing more that your opinions...
Allee From Canada, joined Jun 1999, 464 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 792 times:
Now, with a requirement for 100 aircraft to replace four types, including the smaller ones like the F-28 and BAe 146, wouldn't it make sense for Boeing to launch and offer the 717-100?
CPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4744 posts, RR: 31 Reply 11, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 798 times:
You know, I was thinking exactly the same thing myslef, Alee. A combination of 717-100 and 717-200 would be perfect, assuming a shortened (70-80 pax) 717 is ever produced. That would obviosuly be better than A318 - much lighter and more efficient. A fleet of 100 is large enough to justify a seperate aircraft and engine type...but we know how Air Canada always seems to be in bed with Airbus.
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 784 times:
The way I see it, there is two distinct requirements here. One is for a medium haul 100 seater for routes such as YYZ-Saskatchewan and YYZ-St. John's. Secondly, a shorter haul aircraft is needed for routes like YYC-YVR or YHZ-YYT (Halifax-St. John's). For the first group of routes A318/19/20's seem the way to go. On the other hand, a more regional approach is needed for the second requirement.
Also, IMHO AC wouldn't think worry too much about the extra 10 or 15 seats of a 717 to replace the 146's. The F28's are a really interesting problem, however. They need a 5-abreast RJ 50 seater, which doesn't exist for new airplanes, and I don't really see them going for the 728Jet for several reasons. So I wonder, how will they approach that problem? The most feasible way I can see is CRJ's in slow hours mixed with a few 717's at peak times. But then again, only a few routes are really in need of the F28's, mainly Saskatchewan and maritime regional routes with a few other regional markets of less importance as well.
Airman99o From Canada, joined Aug 1999, 963 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 778 times:
I would love Air Canada and it's regional affiliates launch the newest version of the bombardier Regional jet. it would look good for the national Airline to support the Canadian Economy and you would still have a comminality with the CL-65. It would be great to see it in Air Nova colours and what ever affililiate will be recieving it as well.
I hope that Air Canada keeps up with the comminality thing cause it is far cheaper in regards to keeping costs down when it comes to training. think about it the same instruments in the A-319, 320, 340. so it would be crazy to go and buy some boeings, Not biased, and go screw up the cost effectivness of the comminality!!
Well I suppouse that we will just all have to wait and see what happens with his decision. Unfortunatly we cannot make it for him, but how i wish that I could!!
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Reply 14, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 761 times:
Obviously we are all most interested in the narrow-bodies because there are such a large fleet to replace with several varied types, but also what about the 767's? The article mentions keeping the -300's, but disposing of the -200's for conversion into freighters. Does this mean selling them, or keeping a few of them as freighters for AC? Also, what would we see them replaced with on the domestic trunk routes like YYC-YYZ or YUL-YYZ or YVR-YYZ? A330's? A321's? Or standardizing to 767-300's? Also, with 23 767-200's in the fleet, that's a lot of wide-bodies to replace, and they are being used to open up a lot of new routes like YYZ-CPH, YYZ-Munich, YYZ-AMS, and so on, so would a larger aircraft be suited to those operations? Also, there would be 767-300's from AC with P&W power, and CP's with GE-would they keep the P&W powered machines?
C-FTOD From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 757 times:
Very interesting point AC183. AC uses its 767s for a wide variety of routes - both international and short -haul YUL-YYZ. So to come up with one replacement aircraft would be difficult. The A321 would be fine for Canadian routes but what would they do for YYZ-LHR currently served by 767s and others? I don't see AC ordering 23 A330s. There just too big. What Airbus needs is an A325!
This is my prediction for the 767-200s:
AC will replace 15 of them with A321s that will stay on domestic and transborder routes.
AC will replace the remaining 8 with long-haul Airbuses such as the A330-200/300.
For this summer, AC will be short of capacity and be forced to use some of CP's DC-10s.
Just a thought.
Allee From Canada, joined Jun 1999, 464 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 755 times:
Yeah, I think a 717-100 would be a good choice to replace the F28 and BAe 146. After all, it seats like 70-80? (just a guess) Just remember that prior to business class being installed in the F28 and 146, these aircraft had 65 and 83 seats respectively.
I agree CPDC10-30, that a huge order like this would justify launching the variant. Aren't there other airlines that want the -100X? The only one I've heard is British Midland, but that was a while ago.
Flygirl From Canada, joined Jun 2011, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 761 times:
The F28's as aircraft in the new AC fleet represent a direct violation to the AC pilot contract and LOU's in place between the mainline and Tier II operators such as CRA. In laymen's terms, jet engined aircraft over a certain seating capacity cannot be operated by a Tier II carrier. They are considered mainline equipment.
This will have an impact on what kind of aircraft are purchased to replace CRA's fleet in the new combined airline providing CRA is not sold. The latest information given via employee update predicts that CRA will go on sale officially any day now, valued at about $175 million. Ironic that this sale price if almost double what AC paid for the entire Cdn. network.
This contract issue must be negotiated through first and will ultimately dictate what new equipment is bought as replacements for the F28's, in my opinion.
A report from a British news release (I can't find the blinking link right now) speculated that the A320-500 and A320-700 will be the Airbus models of choice. Just a speculation though, not based in fact. < >
Samurai 777 From Canada, joined Jan 2000, 2451 posts, RR: 6 Reply 18, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 745 times:
All very interesting points you guys have made! But what the hell is the A325 and the A320-500 and the A320-700? I have NEVER heard of ANY of those variants ever being proposed by Airbus!
I greatly agree with the both of your posts, though. It's true that if CRA was bought up by AC, the F28s would have to go under AC, not AC Regional due to the pilots union contracts. The AC Pilots union contract may not be likely to change in the near future, that's what some people say, but I'm not so sure in my opinion. Especially if CRA doesn't fall into AC hands. As for CRA being on sale...you can bet that there are customers out there who'd snap it up in a second! AA's been eyeing it for quite a while. Don't be so sure about AC getting its hands on it if no-one else takes it, because someone is bound to do so.
If AC wanted an Airbus widebody for a 767 replacement, it'd probably go for the A330-200(already in production of course) or the A330-100(proposed by Airbus). A321s could well be in the cards, especially for routes where there are very high average load factors on A320s being used.
Flygirl From Canada, joined Jun 2011, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 746 times:
<:D> You caught me Samurai! Forgive me for those A320 numbers. As I stated, I couldn't find the link where I read the information and used my faulty memory in an attempt to recollect the A320 model numbers. I bow to those more knowledgeable in this area than me and won't attempt that again. Suffice to say that two model numbers were mentioned in a combination to fill the 100 aircraft order. One larger in capcity than the other.
CRA is very vulnerable to a purchase right now as you pointed out. May I note for you however that the CCAA protection that CAIL was brought under did not specifically include CRA. The scuttlebutt around "the office" is that this was done on purpose to make CRA less attractive as a purchase target. The reasoning is who would bid on it if the unprotected assets could be yanked at any given time by a creditor. Just my opinion, but I think ideally, AC wanted to make that filing coincide with any paper offer for CRA. Any offer would probably had conditions of which this filing, timed right, would have not satisfied. Did I say that right?
AC has admitted via employee bulletin that the filing for CCAA protection was done "earlier than planned". An unsubstantiated incident is circulating that an attempt to seize a 747 was made late last week in HKG by a creditor. It took twenty-four hrs. to negotiate getting it back, hence the abrupt filing. It is a fact that a 24 hr. cycle of the aircraftoperating (flts. 7 and 8) between YVR and HKG were cancelled March 25-26 due to reported "operational problems". Is the timing of the rumour and the fact just coincidence?
C-FTOD From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 742 times:
Airliners rule, it seems to me extremely unlikely that AC will ever purchase the 777. We looked at it, but got frustrated by Boeing's negotiating team. They were unwilling to budge in many areas. Once the choice was made to go with the A340, that was a decision that would affect the next 2 decades. AC will not go back to the 777 - it's too late.
Besides, if you want to see a 777 in AC colours, then look at the 767 - not much difference from far away!
Just kidding
DeltaAir From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1094 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 737 times:
Boeing wouldn't budge, sounds like a good thing that might be required to make a profit. Airbus likes to budge.
AC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 3 Reply 24, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 734 times:
Ah, Flygirl, FYI the A318, A319, A320 and A321 are the A32X family variants AC would look at, the 318 is about 100 seats and the others go up from there. I think you're confusing A340-500 and -600 aircraft, which are bigger A340 variants for long haul flights currently in development (and on order by AC).
As far as CRA goes, their employees really really want to go into the merged AC regional. I'm not betting that they'd be sold, but I'm sure there will be interested lookers. AA is one, but NW is also rumoured to be looking because it wants to protect its Canadian market share.
I think AC would like to keep CRA, but at the very least it needs it for the summer schedule in order to have enough aircraft for a lot of regional routes.
Regarding CRA scope clauses, yes they could be a mess but then again maybe they won't be all that hard to sort out. Basically the AC regionals are upset about not getting CRJ's, and the AC pilots don't like the AirBC and AirNova 146's doing flying that is basically equivalent to taking over DC-9 work. I think that if AC bought some 100 seaters (ie- about 90 seats with business class) and took over the 146 routes with the regionals dumping those planes, and AC took over some F28 work equal to about 15 aircraft (dumping the 28's for new equipment, of course), they'd be OK. Then just replace the other 15-17 F28's with RJ's and hand the AC CRJ's over to the regional operations. Then they could define the scope contracts as the regionals being responsible for aircraft with 4 abreast or narrower, and AC would handle 5 or more abreast seating configured aircraft (ie-biz class). That's just something I see as a viable stance from both sides, but I think it's got potential to diffuse the matter, it addresses the fears by ACPA that the regionals will infringe on their flying more and more, and it addresses fears by regionals that AC would keep them from growing or buying RJ's that they want.
On that rumour of the 747 seizure, I heard that too. But you would think if they struck a deal that they'd announce another creditor coming onside, but maybe not. I think the 747 fleet would then be basically negotiated for, what worries me is the 320 fleet hasn't really showed up as aircraft that lease deals have been struck for. And those are the key aircraft for transcon fleet renewal. Still, Brotto has said they have alternate aircraft arranged if a creditor walks, so I'm not too worried, but it could create a real mess in the sked for a few days if it happened.
Also Flygirl, did you see that article in the National Post a few days ago about the CCAA filing? The creditors were quoted as saying something about how their holding the YVR operations base meant they had the trump card. But an analyst was quoted as saying AC was the only possible buyer and he doubted the creditors would manage to sell their collateral for more than the 92% AC offered. Just found it interesting after that previous discussion thread...
25 Flygirl: First of all, I want to express to you the enjoyment I have gotten out of reading your informative and logical posts. It's always a pleasure to run ac
26 Slawko: Well looks like we will be subjected to aibus garbage even on the short haul aircraft. It's too bad, because Boeing makes good airplanes, Much better
27 CX747: I truly don't think that Boeing has much of a chance in this competition. Air Canada has been with Airbus since the beginning of the decade when lets
28 Tullamarine: This was an informative and interesting post until it degenerated into yet another Boeing v Airbus diatribe. Both Airbus and Boeing produce excellent
29 AC183: Slawko, would you please quit taking every chance you get to infer bad things about Airbus. If you only reason for pro-Boeing is because of the old Av
30 Samurai 777: Aw, c'mon Slawko! Boeing is NOT dead in Canada! Look at WestJet. It's got at least 70 737-700s on the way.
31 Ywg777: Boeing is dead. Its still aliver. WJ has a busch of boeing aircradt. From what I herd TS m9ight order more 757-200's. Also AC may order more 767-300/4
32 C-FTOD: Westjet, if it doesn't put itself out of business by expanding too fast, will provide some room for Boeing to reestablish itself in Canada. What do yo
33 CX747: I think that Westjet has a really good chance of challenging Air Canada. I feel that the company is better run and its company spirit and service will
34 YWG777: Thats what I herd about AA,NW trying to fly doemestically. AA wants more markets in Canada and because CP is out of One world they feel that one world
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4744 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4365 posts, 
From France, joined May 1999, 1704 posts, 
>
Printer friendly format 
