MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4453 posts, RR: 33
Reply 4, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1935 times:
Please explain your examples... I don't get it yet.
NW 757... an oddball, OK, because NW always ignored the 737 and 767, but the 40 757s flying right now are the only aircraft filling the gap between their 150-seaters and their big DC-10s and 747s, which makes it perfect for their longer transcon flights, or long thin routes like MSP-ANC.
The Delta 772 is a good replacement for their Tristars and MD-11s. The 767 is a bit to small for their longest and most prestigious routes, and I imagine it's marketing-wise to fly a well-liked big aircraft. Imagine if DLs biggest aircraft was the 767 (if the Tristars and MD-11s are retired), DL would be taken less seriously by customers and press, and nobody would believe they're almost the biggest airline in the world. Of course economics is the main factor... therefore DL (and AA) don't buy 744s, but the 772 is able to perfom fine economically on their route-system.
Best examples of airliners which doesn't fit in, are the ones bought for political reasons. BOAC and BEA (before becoming BA) were stuck with British built aircraft which they didn't want. In the cold war, airlines had to buy aircraft of their alleys, so many (ex) communist countries got Tupolevs while they preferred Boeing/Airbus.
Or sometimes an airline isn't happy with an airliner, which was originally planned to replace half or whole their fleet in that range, and ends up with a small number, along other comparible types. The 15 MD-90s of Delta are an example, which operate alongside older 722s and MD-80s and newer 738s, all with about the same capacities. Or the MD-11s of Delta and American (they originally planned to get 40 each of them, I guess, but they stopped after 15/18).
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
DL Widget Head From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2104 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1888 times:
You couldn't be more wrong about the 777 and Delta. The 777 is a bit bigger and far more economical than the MD11 which Delta wants to evetually eliminate from the fleet. The 777 has proven popular with the flight crews, maintenance, management, and the passengers. So, I don't understand your point.
Mas777 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 1999, 2938 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1865 times:
Malaysia Airlines' Airbus A330s are a bit odd aren't they - the fleet of them seem to pop up on the strangest of routes that you wouldn't think MAS would put them on.
They were a great A300 replacement - granted but their role has been superceded by the 747/777 mix that MAS now operates.
MAS should dispose of them as its likely they will order the 777LR (and not the A340NG as discussed before). MAS should also order a mix of 737NG and 757s. Its odd that MAS never found a use for the 757 - it would fit it perfectly - as MAS likes using the 737 on regional routes but has found the A330/777 often too large as a replacement when the 737s are full.
CV990A From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1872 times:
Actually, I have to agree, I could never understand why AA bought the A300, when it already had the 767. Also, why are airlines buying both the A330/A340 and the 777, wouldn't it make more economic sense to operate just one family of long-haul airliners?
LH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1850 times:
I agree with you CV990A and PH-BZA, the A300 really doesn't make much sense, but I'm pretty sure the main reason for their place in the AA fleet goes back to the late 80's. The 767 was fairly new, as was the newer varsion of the A300, the -600R. Both were similar in range and capacity, and both could fit in similar roles. The reason the A300's found their way into the AA fleet is because Boeing more-or-less refused to lower their price on the 767-300ER. Although AA favoured the Boeing aeroplane, they threatened to buy the A300 if Boeing didn't lower the price. Boeing thought AA was bluffing, and refused. AA subsequently bought 35 of them, and Boeing later reduced the price, and AA now has almost 50 767-300ER in their fleet.
Well, up until recently the A320's in British Airways fleet. They were only there because of the B-Cal purchase, and there are only 10 of them. Now, of course, the A319 and A320 will become the dominant short-haul aeroplane in the BA fleet.
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Bacardi182 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1091 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1826 times:
i think the 737-800s just dont fit in at american. they just dont look right. I think that the A300s at american fit in very well at their miami hub. are you sure that AA bought them? i thought they are leasing them and can return them anytime they want? i think that the 767s at JAL dont fit in very well either. Why does cathay pacific operate both the 777/747 and A330/A340?
CV990A From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 1445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1801 times:
Let's see here- Air France operates the A330/A340 and the 777, Singapore also operates the A340 and 777.
Also the A310's arrived first at Aeroflot- I think they were the first Western equipment certified in the former USSR, that's why Aeroflot has them- the 737s/767s/777s were a later series of orders.
Sabena's MD-11s are operated by CityBird- they're not actually owned by Sabena, also Aer Lingus' MD-11 is a seasonal wet-lease from World to increase capacity. The 737s and 767s at Iberia are leased from Air Europa because Iberia is prohibited from adding types to their fleet as an EU condition for Spanish governemnt loans to the airline- the A321/A319 order pre-dated this exemption 'tho...
Jet Setter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1786 times:
Iberia have reached agreement with their pilots are now operating their own 767s using their own pilots, sensible really when you consider they're still adding to their sizeable 757 fleet. Ture, Air Europa do operate the 737-400s, but they are effectively part of the IB fleet in full livery etc - it is a bit strange seeing a 737 in Iberia livery!
Sabena now dry leases the MD-11s from CityBird using it's own crews (according to the article in "Airways" a few months back) Again looks strange in the Sabena livery - ditto an Aer Lingus MD-11 wearing full livery!
MD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8515 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1776 times:
To change the subject a little bit, how about airplanes that really fit well with their airline? Some of my favorites are below:
MD-88 (quiet and comfortable, perfect for their short southeastern routes)
L-1011 (Queen of the Atlantic)
MD-90 (there aren't enough of them, but it's excellent hot-and-high performance and good serve it well out west).
The 717 was made for them. They've already practically announced that they'll be ordering some soon to repkace aging DC-9s.
Weird aircraft of the past:
Pan Am's DC-10s and L-1011s. You never think of PAA with anything but 747s.
Delta and AA's 747s. They just didn't look right.
1011 FAN From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1732 times:
Definately the AA 737s ... When you think of AAs narrow body fleet you think MD80 or 757...I guess it will take some getting uesd to..
As far as what just seems right...DL L-1011s, UA DC-10s, TWA747s SW 737s...
Dc-9-10 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 585 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (15 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1718 times:
I guess that i didnt make my statement well enough. I am not talking about economic statue of the airplane but how the aircraft just donest seem to fit with the airline in a sceme. Like when you think of the 777 you think of United or BA NOT Delta, and when you think of the 757 you think of Delta or American.
get the idea.
: I always though Eastern DC-10's, and 747's as well as United L1011's were wierd in both the scheme and the fleet uncommanality.
26 Samurai 777
: How about these? PWA(Pacific Western Airlines) - This Canadian domestic airline (now a part of CP) had 767-200s, and stranger still, they used it more
: Thinking back a few years, Eastern had a few DC-8s in it's fleet. Now that was a strange site. Also Continental had a few 747s (ex PeoplExpress?)also
: Re: CO 747's: In the late 60's Continental was lobbying the Nixon Administration for authority to serve Australia and New Zeland. Sources close to the