Parker must already be aware of this possibility and have a fallback plan. My guess - he's got a few 787 leases with ILFC on standby waiting for an official announcement - maybe for delivery as soon as next year. US would then scribe a purchase order for the next available lot.
Manni From Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4220 posts, RR: 24 Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 month 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5409 times:
Quoting Vega (Thread starter): My guess - he's got a few 787 leases with ILFC on standby waiting for an official announcement - maybe for delivery as soon as next year.
That would be impressive. Must have missed Boeings' announcement that the 787 will be a year earlier in service as planned.
Jokes aside. If anything US will order more A330s. A lot more needs to hapen before US drops the company that was prepared to save their butt.
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 5597 posts, RR: 5 Reply 2, posted (3 years 1 month 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5406 times:
Quoting Manni (Reply 1): If anything US will order more A330s. A lot more needs to hapen before US drops the company that was prepared to save their butt.
Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans - John Lennon
NYC777 From United States, joined Jun 2004, 4291 posts, RR: 45 Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5022 times:
Three numbers: 787.
Heck they don't owe anything to Airbus and they should have the best possible aircraft out there. The 787-8 would be perfect fit for them.
EasternSon From United States, joined Jun 2006, 554 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4941 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 5): Heck they don't owe anything to Airbus and they should have the best possible aircraft out there. The 787-8 would be perfect fit for them.
I remember several threads mentioning the very large rift created between US Air and Boeing a few years back.
If Airbus does stop the A350XWB, will US Air and Boeing make up, or is there still enough animosity to kill potential orders?
"The only people for me are the mad ones...." Jack Kerouac
N328KF From United States, joined May 2004, 5580 posts, RR: 7 Reply 7, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4926 times:
Quoting EasternSon (Reply 6): I remember several threads mentioning the very large rift created between US Air and Boeing a few years back.
If Airbus does stop the A350XWB, will US Air and Boeing make up, or is there still enough animosity to kill potential orders?
I don't know why everyone keeps pointing to this.
US Airways in 2006 does not equal US Airways of old. You are really talking about what used to be America West, management intact, which happens to have acquired the assets and employees of US Airways. America West had a cordial (though not necessarily close) relationship to Boeing.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Flyboyaz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4926 times:
I know someone at work asked about this. They were told basically nothing...lol...just that we are waiting to see what happens. We have more A330's on order I believe...the -200's. If anything they would probably just take them instead. While it's possible we could see the 787...I don't think it will happen.
D L X From United States, joined May 1999, 7744 posts, RR: 54 Reply 10, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4877 times:
Quoting EasternSon (Reply 6): I remember several threads mentioning the very large rift created between US Air and Boeing a few years back
That was two (three?) management teams ago. I doubt that the events causing the rift have much effect now. All that has effect now is money, moolah, cheddar, etc.
We were talking about this at the office too and the company obviously hasn't made any internal announcements or murmers as of yet. I am hoping for the 787, but we owe Airbus. My stance is, if they (Airbus) cannot come up with the plane that fits our plan (A350), we shouldn't have to hold up our end of the arrangement. Thus, we would be free to go for the Dreamliner. Can somebody clarify whether or not we are committed to Airbus in return for the loan forgivement or is it just a handshake deal.
Jdwfloyd From United States, joined Feb 2005, 829 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4752 times:
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 13): That's my understanding as well. Didn't Parker state a few months back that they were under no obligation anymore to take the A350?
The only thing US still owes Airbus is a hand shake for the loan. Everything is paid back.
This management team is running US like a business and less like an airline. So they will go with the A/C that will keep them in the black. Waiting for an A/C they may never even be built is not conducive to this strategy. IMO US will opt for the 787-800 and still take the deliveries of the 332s and 321s that are on order. Those Airbuses will be the last to come from France with US paint on them. By the time US is ready to replace their narrow body fleet Boeing will have it waiting for them. In twenty years the last remaining Airbuses wearing US's livery will be the 332s and 333s.
"Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them" Ronald Reagan
FCYTravis From United States, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 9 Reply 17, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4578 times:
Quoting EasternSon (Reply 16): Is there still 'old' US Air influence around to dissuade future Boeing orders? Enough for them to just sit back and see what pans out with the A350?
US Airways can't wait that long. They're in desperate need of new widebody aircraft to expand the PHL transatlantic hub, open up FRA/LGW from Phoenix and potentially go transpacific. They can't economically do any of that with the planes they have now - every A333 is spoken for.
Heck, the 762s are about to go through a complete interior refresh including new Envoy seats. I'm sure Parker would rather not spend the money on that, but he doesn't really have a choice given that they won't be replaced for another decade or so now. US might end up the last major airline to fly transatlantic 767s.
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
EasternSon From United States, joined Jun 2006, 554 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4477 times:
Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 17): They're in desperate need of new widebody aircraft to expand the PHL transatlantic hub, open up FRA/LGW from Phoenix and potentially go transpacific.
How would either the A350 or B787 help on transpacific routes? Aren't these aircraft made for medium-haul?
If they can't wait for the A350, and don't want to spend money upgrading the older B767, why wouldn't they order more A330 aircraft? Wouldn't they be delivered before either the A350 or B787?
"The only people for me are the mad ones...." Jack Kerouac
Stitch From United States, joined Jul 2005, 15806 posts, RR: 63 Reply 20, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4438 times:
Quoting Manni (Reply 1): If anything US will order more A330s.
Agreed. The A330s fit their route structure well. If Airbus can get newer generation engines on them, they should meet US' near-term needs even better.
Quoting EasternSon (Reply 6): I remember several threads mentioning the very large rift created between US Air and Boeing a few years back.
While time heals all wounds, money works about as well, I imagine.
Quoting EasternSon (Reply 18): How would either the A350 or B787 help on transpacific routes? Aren't these aircraft made for medium-haul?
Both planes are claimed to be capable of over 8000nm range, easily handling trans-Pacific ops.
Flyusairways From United States, joined Dec 2005, 140 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4396 times:
Quoting Jdwfloyd (Reply 15): This management team is running US like a business and less like an airline. So they will go with the A/C that will keep them in the black
Exactly. What it comes down to is that business is business and Parker is bound to do what is best for his airline. Without any obligation to the A350, I'm sure Parker will be smart and keep his aircraft options open. IMO, any airline should do whatever is necessary to profitable, and therefore not worry about pledging complete loyalty to one manufacturer. After all, that is what the business world is often all about.
Oh, and I would love to see the 787 is US Airways colors!
FCYTravis From United States, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 9 Reply 22, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4351 times:
Quoting EasternSon (Reply 18): If they can't wait for the A350, and don't want to spend money upgrading the older B767, why wouldn't they order more A330 aircraft?
Because then US is stuck for years with a progressively-obsolescent transatlantic widebody fleet of late-1980s-design aircraft instead of beginning the transition to 21st-century, high-efficiency airframes.
US isn't one of these super-rich Arabian airlines that can afford to buy one or two of everything - given their frugal management style, whatever widebody USAir orders next will become the airline's international backbone well into the mid-part of the 21st century. US would be brain-dead if they placed any orders for A330s beyond what's already on the books (10 A330-200s) - especially with oil prices where they are today.
[Edited 2006-10-06 23:10:50]
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 5597 posts, RR: 5 Reply 23, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4308 times:
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 14): I think you guys are right. The loan has been repayed and they are free to buy anything they want. They owe Airbus nothing.
Quoting NYC777 (Reply 5): Heck they don't owe anything to Airbus and they should have the best possible aircraft out there. The 787-8 would be perfect fit for them.
I wonder how you would react if the loan came from Boeing and they would now turn their back to them and ordering Airbus instead.
Sure the loan is paid back but although it may sound naive I believe even in the aviation business there is a thing called decency.
Airbus helped out as US Airways was in trouble not long ago and now as Airbus is facing some problems US will not turn their back to them and drop them.
As long as Airbus will not cancel the A350 US will stick to it for now.
The A330 is not an undated aircraft even if the first 787 will enter service.
As the A330 entered service not all 767s had been replaced with it although the A330 was the more modern aircraft with better economics.
Airbus will not cancel the A350 it is too important for them and the airlines.
It would be the worst thing that can happen if the 787 is the only aircraft available in that segment. The airlines that have ordered it now and would have to wait for their A350s because of another delay will get some compensation by Airbus or take delivery of some interim A330s for a good price untill their A350s are available.
Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans - John Lennon
Lumberton From United States, joined Jul 2005, 4084 posts, RR: 23 Reply 24, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4208 times:
Quoting Columba (Reply 23): Airbus helped out as US Airways was in trouble not long ago and now as Airbus is facing some problems US will not turn their back to them and drop them.
Was this from the goodness of their heart, or a rational business decision to keep one of their largest customers afloat?
Quoting Columba (Reply 23): The airlines that have ordered it now and would have to wait for their A350s because of another delay will get some compensation by Airbus or take delivery of some interim A330s for a good price untill their A350s are available.
People blithely talk about "compensation" from Airbus as though it's a business strategy, and not the penultimate worst case scenario. I strongly suspect that the "compensation" will never make up for the lost revenue for the airlines and certainly won't endear them to Airbus. Also, there isn't an A330 "tree" where they grow these things. There is quite a backlog.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
Vega From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 25, posted (3 years 1 month 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4184 times:
Quoting FCYTravis (Reply 17): US Airways can't wait that long. They're in desperate need of new widebody aircraft to expand the PHL transatlantic hub, open up FRA/LGW from Phoenix and potentially go transpacific. They can't economically do any of that with the planes they have now - every A333 is spoken for.
That is exactly the point. The 330-200s due in 2008 MAY do PHX-Japan, but would it be economically feasible. It should easily do PHX-LGW, but PHL-Asia, or deep South America will require the A350 or 787. The ? is what are Parker's future plans for international?
Quoting Manni (Reply 1): That would be impressive. Must have missed Boeings' announcement that the 787 will be a year earlier in service as planned.
Must have been asleep at the wheel - meant 2008. ILFC has at least 20 on firm order in the 1st and 2nd runs.
Quoting Jdwfloyd (Reply 15): The only thing US still owes Airbus is a hand shake for the loan. Everything is paid back.
I believe the contract for the purchase of the 350s is binding regardless of whether the loan is paid. The only escape clause is failure to meet performance or delivery schedule - both of which apply if AB cancels the aircraft..
26 Stitch: However, if Airbus re-engines new-build A330s and GE/RR make those engines available to re-engine their existing A330 fleet, that would continue to g
27 FCYTravis: Actually, the delivery schedule won't be met - that happened when Airbus "relaunched" the aircraft as the A350XWB and reset the EIS date. Doug and US
28 Sinlock: Ok here is how it went. Airbus issued a loan for $500M. GE Capital payed off the loan to Airbus. There was NO loan forgivement. In one of the Crew Ne
29 United787: Just buy more A330s. They are still better than 767s, right?
30 PanAm_DC10: Even if that was an option sir they could not do it as ILFC won't take delivery of any 787s until 2010 and even in that event they are all placed. Ju
31 FCYTravis: What's to say that some of those unannounced placements weren't reserved by US Airways? Food for thought, at least.
32 PanAm_DC10: A valid point sir though I am not sure ILFC have enough to meet the need of US as they have 20 on order. Not trying to go too far off topic but ILFC
33 Vega: Additionally, I believe Pegasus still has 2 unannounced 787 aircraft and there are at least 3 UFOs. What I think we are trying to do here in the aren
34 PanAm_DC10: I understand your point sir and concur with it nor was the intent of my post to "cut off the legs" of a suggestion, as you politely put it. If I had
35 HZ747300: I believe the agreement calls for an out clause if the delivery cannot be met by a certain date. Anyhoo, as long as the A330 is in production, then t
36 MCOflyer: My guess is that the A350 program will go down and Parker will order B788 a/c. In addition to that he will order B737 a/c to replace a320x. MCOflyer
37 John: The only new 737 I could potentially see US interested in, would be the 739ER.
38 ATCT: Exactly! Scareways (at least post-piedmont/pre-merger with Cacti) was never one that thought too much in the future. Wouldnt mind seeing 787's though
39 Thegooddoctor: Yeah - I'm trying to imagine you singing the same song if it was the A350 and not the 787 being compared to the A330. Predictions for US Airways: 1)
41 Columba: Well if you would know my statements from other threads I am a big fan of Boeing and the 787 and yes Boeing had troubles in the late ´90s but they g
43 A330323X: US is not committed to the A350XWB, Parker has said so publicly that they can get out of the order with no problems should they so choose. They're ce
44 FCYTravis: Guilty as charged... Hope springs eternal that US will get some more widebodies. I just want to see PHX service open up so I don't have to transit PH
45 Charliejag1: Theres a difference between decency and volunteering to ride the sinking ship to the bottom of the ocean. Parker is smarter than that. Airbus cannot
46 Columba: I agree that US have to see what is best for them. But so far nobody here is really knowing what Airbus is planning to do. Some here paint the future
47 Thegooddoctor: My bad It slipped my mind that they were in Arlington.... The point was that they moved the headquarters across the country because it was, for the m
48 ATWZW170: US doesn't owe Airbus anything. Airbus has been paid back in full and if they are in turn going to have another delay on a program then Dougie needs t
49 Steeler83: Yeah, it was started up in da burgh as All-American Aviation, and then moved to Arlington VA before the merger with HP... It's all good man...
50 ScottB: But...the issue isn't just that US Airways would receive its A350's "later" -- they'd also be getting an airliner that's significantly different from
51 Vega: Guess what, there are now 29 787 UFOs: http://active.boeing.com/commercial/...?content=default.cfm&pageid=m25062
53 Steeler83: They tried to secure 763s some 12 years ago to do PIT-NRT just after the new airport was built, but they could not secure the aircraft. I do think th
54 FCYTravis: They wouldn't really need "more" A332 aircraft... they already have 10 on order, and with the impending 767 interior refresh, they will surely be used
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Korea, joined Nov 2001, 4220 posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 5597 posts, 
From United States, joined Sep 2003, 3568 posts, 
To paraphrase Tina Turner, "What's LUV got to do with this?"
Printer friendly format 
