Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Fleet Order Update.  
User currently offlineSinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1596 posts, RR: 2
Posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 15627 times:

During the CLT MX Town Hall meeting hosted by Parker on 4/18, the Narrowbody/Widebody order was brought up. Here are some of the biggest parts covered. With info from other meetings also.

If things go to Plan, the choice will be announced by the end of May.

The order is for around 80 aircraft. 20-WB and around 60-NB.

The order will most likely got to only one manufacture due to package pricing. (i.e. all A or all B but no mix)

Both manufactures are being very aggressive about winning the order Parker said that when he was HP they never got this amount of attention.

Narrowbodys

The NB will replace 737 classics and the older 757s.
Both aircraft fit the job description but Doug leans toward the 321 due to commonalty and faster delivery.


Widebodys

The A340 leasing for asia is stalled as US is having trouble securing gates from PHL. (Parker did not sound pleased)


The A350 had these points mentioned some good some bad.
Airbus is upholding the 350-Mk1 price for the Mk5 aircraft.
Pilot, MX, Parts Supply commonality.
EIS is not firm.
Profromance #'s are not firm due to ongoing changes.


The 787 had these points mentioned some good some bad.
The 787 is Dougs choice.
EIS is much sooner.
787 is actually firmed up and being built.
Parker would not have the airline be single source supplied.



Near the end of the segment covering the aircraft order Parker asked the MX folks what they thought and had them do a vote by hand. He was very surprised to see nearly all the hands in the room go up in for the 787 and 737. Mostly due to them preferring Boeings MX documentation.




(Note. Information was compiled from multiple sources such as Kirby, Parker, Bular. Point being the info is not just from people who know whats going, its from the people who decide whats going to happen.)


My Country can beat up your Country....
85 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29689 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 15590 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The WSJ reported they still believe US will order the A350XWB and the A320, and that article post-dates this meeting, for whatever that is worth.

User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6681 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 15475 times:

Quoting Sinlock (Thread starter):
The A350 had these points mentioned some good some bad.
Airbus is upholding the 350-Mk1 price for the Mk5 aircraft.
Pilot, MX, Parts Supply commonality.
EIS is not firm.
Profromance #'s are not firm due to ongoing changes.

If US goes Boeing it will most likely because they know when they'll get the planes and what they'll get. If they go Airbus it will probably be because of price and the preference for the A321 voiced above.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineWhappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1562 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 15385 times:

I'm curious about the 340 situation, since there was a thread about AC's 345s going to TAM (I think it was).


-Travel now, journey infinitely.
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 15279 times:

Quoting Sinlock (Thread starter):
Both aircraft fit the job description but Doug leans toward the 321 due to commonalty and faster delivery.

Is this due to higher output?


User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4091 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 15245 times:

Quoting Sinlock (Thread starter):
The 787 had these points mentioned some good some bad.
The 787 is Dougs choice.
EIS is much sooner.
787 is actually firmed up and being built.
Parker would not have the airline be single source supplied.

That to me says loud and clear that Parker never wanted the A350 to begin with. Like others have said, the only reason Airbus would win here is price and US' large fleet of A32S.


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 15216 times:

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 5):
That to me says loud and clear that Parker never wanted the A350 to begin with.

They why would they sign a commitment for the old A350? Are you saying they scammed airbus to get the loan?

A 789 sized aircraft for 788 money sounds good to me but timing seems to go against airbus.

[Edited 2007-05-08 17:29:59]

User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 15053 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 2):
If they go Airbus it will probably be because of price and the preference for the A321 voiced above.

And since they already have A321s, you could also say that they'll get the plane they want from Airbus, not just from Boeing... I know that a lot of people around here are very keen on reducing Airbus to nothing but a company that can only win on pricing, but stop deluding yourself: that's not the case.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 6):
They why would they sign a commitment for the old A350? Are you saying they scammed airbus to get the loan?

Was Parker even the CEO of US Airways then? This was before the US/HP merger - and judging by the above comments ("Parker said that when he was HP they never got this amount of attention") I'd say that he had nothing to do with the loan.

Quoting Sinlock (Thread starter):
Near the end of the segment covering the aircraft order Parker asked the MX folks what they thought and had them do a vote by hand. He was very surprised to see nearly all the hands in the room go up in for the 787 and 737. Mostly due to them preferring Boeings MX documentation.

Fortunately, mx documentation is not the only criterium when ordering planes...  Wink



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8205 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 14976 times:

Once again Doug impresses. It is cool he asked the MX staff which plane they would rather have. He's not just BSing, he probably thinks the MX people know the planes (both 737, 767, A320 and A330) more intimately than he ever will.

PHL is short of international gates which is actually a huge problem. Too bad to hear about that.

If Boeing's 787 price is good, why not just buy that. I can't think of a single reason.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6681 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 14916 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 8):
If Boeing's 787 price is good, why not just buy that. I can't think of a single reason.

From the sound of it Airbus is offering an even better price on the A350; the question is whether US can afford to wait for it.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineBMIFlyer From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, RR: 60
Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 14837 times:

I'm eagerly watching this situation  Smile

I don't mind what way US eventually goes, as both manufacturers offer good products.

As for the gates at PHL (for asia flights), are there really not that many available gates in the Int'l terminal??



Lee



Sometimes You Can't Make It On Your Own
User currently offlinePHLapproach From Philippines, joined Mar 2004, 1231 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 14711 times:

Quoting BMIFlyer (Reply 10):
are there really not that many available gates in the Int'l terminal??

Only 13 at A-West and three are used for DLH, BAW, and AFR. For the past three days we have been using almost everything on the hammerhead like 12, 13, 10 and 8. So now who ever is working those gates has to take all the equipment over there and back.


User currently offlineFlyorski From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 987 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 14563 times:

It will be VERY interesting to see what they decide to order.

Quoting Sinlock (Thread starter):
The A340 leasing for asia is stalled as US is having trouble securing gates from PHL. (Parker did not sound pleased)

Does this mean they will not be flying to China?



"None are more hopelessly enslaved, than those who falsly believe they are free" -Goethe
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2822 posts, RR: 42
Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 14354 times:

I still maintain there is absolutely no chance that US goes 787, but it's a real sign of the 787's strength that US still looks like they are considering it. However, with US already in the 320 camp (how many 737's do they have right now?), Airbus forgiving 20 million dollars of debt (which they appear already to have done -- indicating that this may all be a show for investors benefit), and the little nugget below:

Quoting Sinlock (Thread starter):
Airbus is upholding the 350-Mk1 price for the Mk5 aircraft.

Boeing would be insane to compete here. Airbus has to keep this customer, as it's the only customer they have on US soil for the 350 right now. Boeing has their entire production line sold out past the A350's introduction. They don't need this order.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29689 posts, RR: 84
Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 14330 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 13):
Boeing would be insane to compete here...They don't need this order.

It was that kind of thinking that helped allow Airbus to capture 50%+ of the market...

It goes beyond just the 787. There is also the narrowbody expansion and narrowbody replacement orders. And if US grows, they will need planes with greater then 300-seats, which could land them 777 and Y3 orders.


User currently offlineBrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 14169 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 13):
Boeing has their entire production line sold out past the A350's introduction. They don't need this order.

What a weird thing to say that a company should not compete simply because it " doesn't need the order". I don't think that Boeing would turn away an order for its product at any time.  scratchchin 



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7027 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 14132 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
From the sound of it Airbus is offering an even better price on the A350; the question is whether US can afford to wait for it.

They have A332 on order and Airbus could offer them some more interim A330s until the A350 is ready.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 14089 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 13):
Airbus has to keep this customer, as it's the only customer they have on US soil for the 350 right now.

They sold two A350XWB's to Pegasus Aviation.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineSkyyMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 14078 times:

After today's publishings of DOT's statistics, US focus should be getting the current aircraft they have now in the air and making the pax a little happier than they have been. Othwerwise, they may not need to order anything new. At their current rate of self destruction, they seem a likely candidate for revisiting BK. 56% on time rate isn't going to cut it, no matter how you assign the blame.

User currently offlineWalter747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1440 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 13918 times:

Quoting Whappeh (Reply 3):
I'm curious about the 340 situation, since there was a thread about AC's 345s going to TAM

Me also. I thought they were getting them.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 8):

PHL is short of international gates which is actually a huge problem. Too bad to hear about that.

Yes  Sad

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 13):
Boeing has their entire production line sold out past the A350's introduction. They don't need this order.

US already bought the "spots". So if they did choose the 787 they would get them in 2009.



Hussel, Hussel, Husel, Grind, Grind, Grind
User currently offlineUsairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3326 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 13813 times:

Don't the A320's and A321's have some range issues when it comes to operating trans con flts?

Also i find it hard to believe that not having enough gates at PHL is the reason why the A340 deal has stalled. I mean they already agreed to keep DL out of A for the time being so that gives US the most amount of international gates at PHL.

Where does US want LH, BA, and AF to go...park on the runway???

There are some remote parking stands in PHL why can't US use them if need be. In Europe paxs are bused from their aicraft to the terminal all the time. I just did it in LHR and FCO.


User currently offlineVega From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 13540 times:

IMO, one of the major drawbacks with the 350XWB is that general size, shape and weight specs will not be firmed until October 2008 - that's more than a year from now and.detailed performance specs won't obviously be available until sometime after that. Signing a contract now, even with delay/performance penalties, would be tantamount to buying "something" in an unopened box. Probably not a wise corporate level decision. On the other hand, if the price discount is significant enough and it applies to both the A350 and A321 Orders, it may be worth the risk - IF Airbus can provide US with interim long-haul aircraft (A332s and A340s). Currently, 10 332s are scheduled to start delivery to US sometime late next year through 2009 - these could possibly be accelerated (as part of a 350 deal), since Airbus is planning to ramp up 332 production. Obviously Asia from the U.S. East Coast will require A340s or 777-200ERs. As far as earlier delivery of the 787 as a key factor in selecting it over the A350XWB, 787s ordered today (because of backlog) would likely not be delivered until at least 2012-2013 - about the same time as the expected 2013 delivery of the first 350s. However, US could possibly work a deal with Boeing for a few earlier deliveries. I would bet the deal between Parker and PHL airport regarding the A340 and Gates is the same as has been for the past year. Parker wants all of A-East as a dedicated International Terminal and PHL is moving in the opposite direction - primarily because of WN's expansion plans. BA was the last holdout in A-East and has now moved to new facilities in A-West, leaving the only international flying (Caribbean only) by AA and several US Trans-Atlantic 757s and caribbean straglers. The plan is for DL to move into 4 gates in A-East in late Fall with their Crown Room. This probably even makes Parker more furious. Personally, I side with Parker on this and feel A-East should retain it's intended purpose - ALL International, but I also understand the relationship established between WN and PHL when US was facing liquidation. I believe (IMO) that US is already looking at 767-300s as an interim international solution instead of the 332s (Europe), in the event the 787 is selected. The 767-300 could use A-East gates. A340-500s would likely require A-West.

User currently offlineAVinutso From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 13501 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
It was that kind of thinking that helped allow Airbus to capture 50%+ of the market...

My thoughts exactly. Being aggressive for the US order is exactly what B needs to do. Whether they win the order or not, it will send a message that Boeing is not becoming complacent as happened in the '90's and is out there hustling orders. Airbus is not dead and if Boeing does not fight for major orders, Boeing will skid again. Who knows, they may win it.

J



Maybe we shoulda thought of that FIRST
User currently offlineBlsbls99 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 345 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 13355 times:

Quoting Vega (Reply 21):
As far as earlier delivery of the 787 as a key factor in selecting it over the A350XWB, 787s ordered today (because of backlog) would likely not be delivered until at least 2012-2013 - about the same time as the expected 2013 delivery of the first 350s.

US Airways has stated previously that they do have slots reserved with Boeing for 787s. I don't believe that they are as late as 2012-2013, but earlier (from what I remember reading).



319 320 313 722 732 733 735 73G 738 739 742 752 763 772 CRJ D9S ERJ EMB L10 M88 M90 SF3 AT4
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 13333 times:

Quoting Vega (Reply 21):
IMO, one of the major drawbacks with the 350XWB is that general size, shape and weight specs will not be firmed until October 2008 - that's more than a year from now and.detailed performance specs won't obviously be available until sometime after that.

You might want to read Astuteman's post #4 on this other thread here...
Airbus Meets Pressure To Deliver On A350 (by BoomBoom May 8 2007 in Civil Aviation)

... and you'll probably realize that you're wrong...  Wink



Smile - it confuses people!
25 Post contains links Vega : NO, what I reaized is that I was RIGHT! http://www.euro2day.gr/articlesfna/34287280/
26 Post contains images Leskova : Then you're obviously missing the relevant part... ... the freeze expected for October next year is not the one that produces the data relevant for a
27 LGA777 : There are gates on A-Eaat that have been used by BA (744, 777) and LH (744,346) so if needed the A345 should fit on A-East as well. Also most flights
28 Vega : What?? Please provide a reference. I'm aware of that and have mentioned it several times in other Threads regarding the 340 fit at PHL.. My statement
29 Walter747 : Most European flights leave at night and arrive back in late afternoon. So A-east would have all morning and early afternoon empty.
30 2wingtips : Thanks for the update. Your information would clearly indicate a preference for the 787 by Parker. Do you have any information on NB preference, spec
31 Post contains links Blsbls99 : http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...conews&tkr=LCC:US&sid=aa5566UDGUfA This states that they have delivery slots at Boeing for the 787, and that t
32 Vega : I know US has reserved slots. My point is that unless US is one of the UFOs (unlikely), I'd be shocked to see how they could get delivery before 2012
33 PanAm330 : I would like to see US go Boeing on this one, mostly because their A32S aircraft are not going to handle transcon flights very well after the recent r
34 Dank : It's not as if the comprable 737s could do substantially better with the same configurations. cheers.
35 ERJ170 : Unless I'm mistaken, US got the slots that EK or SQ (or somebody who decided to go A350) gave up.. and I do believe also they are 2009 slots.. probab
36 Jfk777 : USAIRways's fleet replacement program is like one of those Spanish telenovelas, more twists and turns then JR ewing on Dallas. Buy something new, plea
37 Whappeh : You're talking as if they're buying Snickers Candy Bars. These aircraft orders are going to be for more money then you, me and everyone else that has
38 ScottB : I think the City of Philadelphia would probably be a bit more receptive to US Airways in this area if (1) the additional international flying from PH
39 PanAm330 : Actually, they can. According to Airbus, with 150 pax, the A320 has a 3000nm range, and the A321 carries 185 pax just as far. The Boeing 737-900ER ca
40 Sinlock : Parker stated that if it were up to him the order would A321s and 787's but that isn't going to happen because the A and B are pitching the NB and WB
41 PHLapproach : They are not overloading it one bit. This flight is severely weight restricted. I worked it maybe two weeks ago. Cargo/Baggage was restricted to 4800
42 AirFrnt : No, it was not competing on marginal deals. This deal won't be marginal, it will be a loss leader all around. Sure they will, if they end up basicall
43 Scbriml : Aside from Airbus admitting that the first few A380s will actually make a loss because of the wiring rework, do you have any evidence of either Airbu
44 Flighty : Airbus does not sell A350s for the US Airways A350 price anymore, so that is one piece of evidence.
45 Birdbrainz : Actually, Boeing would be insane NOT to compete here. If nothing else, they can force Airbus to offer an even sweeter deal. Even if they don't win th
46 Corsair1107 : I just don't see this going Boeings way, Parker wants A32X's and I'm sure Airbus will be more than willing to set up some kind of interim help in the
47 Post contains images USAF336TFS : Absolutely on the money. And may I remind those who completely discount a Boeing order, many of the same arguments were made before AC (787, 777), LH
48 Scbriml : Sorry, but that doesn't show anything in respect of selling planes at a loss.
49 Stitch : I disagree. Even with Airbus offering US the original price, there are still ancillaries. US is going to need training for their pilots and mechanics
50 AirFrnt : The word loss leader was too strong, I apologize, but there is absolutely no way Boeing will be willing to give US what Airbus is willing to give US.
51 Post contains images Terryb99 : WAIT, Zeke will make a pretty chart to show why and how the Airbus can do EVERYTHING better than Boeing,
52 Stitch : I'm sorry. I meant 737NG not RS, though landing a 737NG order would equally bode well for a 737RS order down the road.
53 Terryb99 : I am on the maintenance side of the business, supplying parts to airlines and MRO shops around the world. This is a very true statement. Airbus has a
54 SEPilot : Ultimately this will come to bite them. Look at what happened in the beginning of the personal computer age. Apple was there first, and maintained ti
55 TristarSteve : I laughed when I read that. It is so true. Boeing fault finding manuals are really simple and easy to use, but after many years I now think that Airb
56 HPRamper : Because US insists on putting an old A-1 on the flight, or does it even matter? I know it gives our ops people headaches when someone sticks an A-1 o
57 Sinlock : I feel your pain. When one of the A-1s shows up for our FLL-PHX it really sucks. No mail, Freight, and pull half dozen PAX off. And thats with a seat
58 2wingtips : Which is a huge issue for the 321 fleet and a very real reason why US may select the 739ER that will be far less payload restricted on the westbound
59 N710PS : The narrow body portion of the order is large enough to the point where it would be wise to include a new fleet type into the system. Boeing certainly
60 Flighty : They were referring the the A320, in particular the A1 engined America West A320. Not the US Airways A321s. But, they also have problems, albeit a lo
61 Flighty : Welcome to a-net and nice screen name. You are making a theory point and it is very true. The 757 has special capabilities. US is wingletting their b
62 Dank : Hunh. While I would say that at 60 frames, there wouldn't be as big a deal adding another fleet type. I don't see why it would be wise to do so. I me
63 Asuflyer05 : I disagree with the belief that Airbus is offering the best pricing in this competiton. Boeing has a lot to lose if this order goes to Airbus. For st
64 N710PS : ASU the FIrst Airbus A-320 /319 did not even enter the fleet untill 1998 so still less than a decade old actually. The 737 fleet is certainly up there
65 Dank : I'm curious as to why you don't believe this? I'm not saying that it's true or false. But I'd tend to lean towards the Airbus side on which one is of
66 Vctony : I believe ASUflyer was referring to some of the HP A320s, some of which were originally destined to another airline (PanAm?). These Airbuses were supp
67 Logos : Some were originally ordered by PanAm and then destined for Braniff II, who took delivery of a couple, I believe (there are pics in the database). Ch
68 Gigneil : I'm sure you have some sort of evidence to back that up.... NS
69 TropicBird : According to my source, US has been running into a problem because they are reconfiguring their East (original US) Airbus fleet to match those of the
70 Asuflyer05 : HP has A320s built in 1989/1990. As I said in my post, I believe Boeing will be more than willing to play ball to maintain the customer. I don't see
71 Aminobwana : Which is a bad point for the B787 ?? I can ony see a bad one for the B737, as if the B787 is ordered, because of the :"no single source", which would
72 Post contains images 2wingtips : I'm sure I do, but I'm not sharing it with you
73 N710PS : Town hall meetings are suggesting that fleet commonality will play no factor in this decision. The Airbus is having range issues that the 737 will not
74 Dank : I don't disagree that it is possible that Boeing is offering a lower price. But you seem sure that they are. There is no evidence that this is the ca
75 Post contains links Jacobin777 : some more information...still looks like a toss-up to me...... fair use excerpt: "Nocella said the A350-1000, which will be close in size to the 360-s
76 Stitch : Well the 787-9 would also make a solid A330-300 replacement, so that may favor the 787...
77 MotorHussy : Really, I thought the 789 was more in the A332 range. MH
78 2wingtips : In between but a bit closer in size to the A333. Remembering most will use the 789 in 9 abreast for Y as opposed to 8 abreast for the 333 and the 333
79 2wingtips : Interesting SeattlePI article Jacobin. They seem to be leaning heavily towards the 739ER and that is very clear. If it's winner takes all then the 787
80 Manni : Thanks for the update... but the first paragraph is a bit far fetched... "The Boeing Co.'s 787 Dreamliner and its newest 737 still have a good shot a
81 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ...that's what I gathered...it seems as if they like the 739ER numbers quite a bit....this could possibly replace some B752's and/or A321's in the fl
82 Terryb99 : Wasn't the Aibus to UsAirways loan about the same time? Don't think anyone would not think the two events were tied together.
83 N710PS : Contrary to what everone beleives the loans to Airbus were reimbursed to the maximum when US/HP corperate and financial operations became one in the s
84 Post contains images Dank : The US's filing with the SEC and Airbus beg to differ (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21590239-643,00.html): "US Airways is expec
85 2wingtips : Any recent updates in the last week? I'm expecting US to make their decision by end of this month and likely announce at Le Bourget. Is that still the
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...
Boeing Order Update: 22 March 2007 posted Thu Mar 22 2007 16:13:48 by Manni
Boeing Order Update: 22/02 posted Thu Feb 22 2007 17:17:44 by Manni
Could US/Mesa Order The CRJ900X? posted Sun Feb 18 2007 16:16:48 by CRJ900
1 FEB: Boeing's Order Update posted Thu Feb 1 2007 16:28:47 by Manni
US Replacement Order For 737 posted Wed Jan 31 2007 21:50:01 by Cltguy
Boeing Order Update For 1/9/07 posted Thu Jan 11 2007 17:22:36 by NYC777
Garuda Fleet Planning Update posted Wed Jan 3 2007 09:02:57 by PanAm_DC10
Etihad Airways Fleet Latest Update posted Mon Dec 18 2006 13:41:48 by EtihadAirways
Will Any US Airline Order The 777-300ER? posted Fri Dec 15 2006 15:21:10 by RootsAir
Austrian Air: Fleet Planning Update posted Mon Dec 11 2006 22:47:56 by PanAm_DC10