Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Wants 5 Additional A332, A318 Still On Books  
User currently offlineClipper136 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 319 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9202 times:

Interesting information contained in the US Airways 9OCT07 SEC Form 8-K filing.

US has NOT cancelled the 15 A318 previously ordered by AW, but has "rescheduled delivery".
US wants 5 additional A332, pending Board Approval ( from the original A332 order from 1998).
A350 XWB order brakes down to 18 - 800s and 4 - 900s, plus options, that are not specified.
US also holds additional options for the A330/A340 that are not specified.

US Airways SEC 8-K filing

47 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDelawareUSA From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 107 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 9202 times:

Why A318 when the Emb 175 and 195 has simular performance?

User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9202 times:

Quoting DelawareUSA (Reply 1):
Why A318 when the Emb 175 and 195 has simular performance?

Neither do. They may have a similar capacity but not the same payload or range.

Out of hot and high Vegas and Phoenix, the A318 could easily service secondary markets to the East that an Embraer couldn't.

And before the refrain that the A318 and A319 are the same, that's crap. F9 loves theirs.

NS


User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

Quoting Clipper136 (Thread starter):
US has NOT cancelled the 15 A318 previously ordered by AW, but has "rescheduled delivery".

HP converted their orders to A319s and a320s... if US indeed orders a318s, then they are new orders since the HP days..



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 3):
HP converted their orders to A319s and a320s... if US indeed orders a318s, then they are new orders since the HP days..

The SEC filing differs, and I tend to believe official federal documents.

NS


User currently offlineN710PS From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1166 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

318's are not on the books. Nor is it wanted. Too heavy and makes no sense for them considering the fact that the 190's are coming now. Most of the flights it would be used on are covered by Embraer birds or the CR9 and will remain so untill Mesa goes away.


There is plenty of room for Gods animals, right next to the mashed potatoes!
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17671 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 2):
F9 loves theirs.

Nah ah.

Quoting Clipper136 (Thread starter):
US has NOT cancelled the 15 A318 previously ordered by AW, but has "rescheduled delivery".

If those things see the light of day in US colors, I will never say another thing on this site about the A318 again Smile



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 6):
Nah ah.

Well they did participate in a huge Airways article about how they did...

NS


User currently offlineHPAEAA From United States of America, joined May 2006, 1024 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 4):
The SEC filing differs, and I tend to believe official federal documents.

NS

no offence, but link??



Why do I fly???
User currently offlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17671 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 7):
Well they did participate in a huge Airways article about how they did...

It flies real nice, and it's a solid plane just like the 319, but it has high unit costs as everyone has mentioned before. The trip costs are obviously lower than the 319 but not enough to offset the lost 14+/- seats, which will become increasingly apparent as F9's LF hits new record levels. But that's the operating side of the equation...if you can get the planes cheap enough *cough cough*, you can offset the operating costs to a point where it may look ok.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineSxf24 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 9203 times:

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 8):
no offence, but link??

http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html


User currently offlineOvercast From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 161 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

Try :
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/da...00117902207000124/form8k100207.htm

Also states that there are 10 A330 that were previously ordered have been resheduled to 2014 through 2015. It also states that they are cancellable, so still unlikely to get them delivered.


User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16307 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

It's hard to see the business need for the 318 at US. Whatever US markets the 318 could best handle, they could also be handled just fine by a mix of the existing US/USEx CR9, E170/E190 and 319/733 aircraft.

The last thing US needs now is yet another sub-type. They need to rationalize their fleet, not further complicate it.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

Adding CFM powered A318s would add no complication... come on, other Neil, you know that.  Smile The whole point of the Airbus family concept is that they're the same plane.

I agree there may not be a ton of markets for them, although I could see PHX-Caribbean being a pretty handy route for them.

NS


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25431 posts, RR: 86
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8731 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Here's a condensed version of it:

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/071009/7145608-k.html

With this quote:

"In addition, the Amended and Restated Airbus A320 Family Aircraft Purchase Agreement revises the delivery schedule for 15 A318 aircraft and provides US Airways with certain other rights with respect thereto."

I thought that America West had changed them to A319, but it seems they are still on the books.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25431 posts, RR: 86
Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8731 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 9):
.if you can get the planes cheap enough *cough cough*, you can offset the operating costs to a point where it may look ok.

If you have some facts about that, I think you should post them, rather than just making innuendo.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16307 posts, RR: 56
Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 14):
Adding CFM powered A318s would add no complication... come on, other Neil, you know that.

Sure, it would. Adding 318's (instead of 15 319's, for instance) will add another unnecessary complexity to route/capacity planning in an already overly diverse fleet. Better to rationalize the fleet with fewer subtypes.

I agree that adding the 318 to a fleet of JUST the 319-321 could benefit route planning and efficiency, but when that fleet already includes the CR9, E170/E175/E190, and 733, the 318 "destined" routes are already well covered, and the 318 would represent another unneeded sub-type without a dedicated mission. (Fleet) simplicity is best. IMO. So says THIS Neil.  Smile



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineAsiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

Quoting Overcast (Reply 12):
Try :
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/da...00117902207000124/form8k100207.htm

Also states that there are 10 A330 that were previously ordered have been resheduled to 2014 through 2015. It also states that they are cancellable, so still unlikely to get them delivered.

This is a great source.
Should be reflected in Airbus ordersheet, that is to get updated any day.
Looks like US Airways has prepared themself well for the future.



SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12639 posts, RR: 46
Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8731 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 3):
HP converted their orders to A319s and a320s... if US indeed orders a318s, then they are new orders since the HP days..



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 4):
The SEC filing differs, and I tend to believe official federal documents.



Quoting N710PS (Reply 5):
318's are not on the books. Nor is it wanted.

Airbus's O&D spreadsheet for September now shows a single listing for US Airways (rather than the US East & US West used previously). The spreadsheet clearly shows US Airways with 15 x A318 on order.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineAsiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 19):
Airbus's O&D spreadsheet for September now shows a single listing for US Airways (rather than the US East & US West used previously). The spreadsheet clearly shows US Airways with 15 x A318 on order.

Aa far as I can see, the ordersheet is not updated for latest order yet, as it only shows 20 A350 and too few A320s on order.
The SEC filing though is supposed to be correct and if they post the A318 order there, as well as the initial A330s,
the same should show up in Airbus O&D sheet after the next update.

What I'm wondering is why they took up the new A330 order and postponed the old one to 2014-2015??



SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12639 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8731 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 20):
Aa far as I can see, the ordersheet is not updated for latest order yet, as it only shows 20 A350 and too few A320s on order.

It doesn't since it only goes to Sep 30th. However, the claims were that HP had cancelled the A318 order, when they clearly hadn't.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineClipper136 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 319 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 8731 times:

Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 3):
HP converted their orders to A319s and a320s... if US indeed orders a318s, then they are new orders since the HP days..



Quoting N710PS (Reply 5):
318's are not on the books



Quoting HPAEAA (Reply 8):
no offence, but link??

No wonder there are so many needless pandering discusions here on A.net.

The very first post provided an offical link to back statements and still.............


A wise old man once said......

it is better to let the world THINK you are a fool, than to open your mouth and confirm it...... Big grin

 duck 


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7078 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 7622 times:

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 12):
The last thing US needs now is yet another sub-type. They need to rationalize their fleet, not further complicate it.

With the 737 and 767 leaving the fleet US will have a fleet consisting of E-Jets, A318-A321,757,A330 and A350 looks like a very rationalized fleet for me. Also I rememember to have read that US asked Airbus for an improved A321 to replace the 757.

Quoting Yyz717 (Reply 16):
I agree that adding the 318 to a fleet of JUST the 319-321 could benefit route planning and efficiency, but when that fleet already includes the CR9, E170/E175/E190, and 733, the 318 "destined" routes are already well covered, and the 318 would represent another unneeded sub-type without a dedicated mission. (Fleet) simplicity is best. IMO. So says THIS Neil.

As I said above 737 classics will be replaced with A32x so it is really not that complicated AF e.g. has a similar narrowbody fleet.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineMah584jr From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 511 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7622 times:

So much has been made of US Airways fleet in recent times. I'll believe them when I see the planes in person at this point. Filings and documents mean little to me when it comes to US.

User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12740 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7622 times:

Quoting Clipper136 (Thread starter):
US has NOT cancelled the 15 A318 previously ordered by AW, but has "rescheduled delivery".

From what I can tell, that is Airbus jargon for "cancelled".  Smile

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 7):
Well they did participate in a huge Airways article about how they did...

Well, one would not expect them to say they suck, would one? All that would do is hurt any resale value.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
25 Post contains images MaverickM11 : I haven't worked for them in years but I could try asking for actual documents.
26 N710PS : Considering I work for a wholly owned subsidiary and do have hub access to the latest information before the boy wonders that spread it on this site
27 Avek00 : On the books and "on the property" will always mean two very different things -- I fully expect US to either sublease the A318s to someone else or oth
28 Flighty : Add me to the "no A318" list. The A319 can do absolutely anything US would need performance-wise. To me, the story ends there. Regardless of documents
29 Columba : That is why I was thinking they ordered ten additional ones. Since they want to replace the 762 and need more longhaul aircraft for growth ten are no
30 DEVILFISH : I think it is safe to assume that this phrase "and provides US Airways with certain other rights with respect thereto" likely allows US to convert the
31 Mariner : If you haven't worked there "for years" then I presume you mean the first batch, for which they received a standard launch customer discount - they b
32 Post contains images MaverickM11 : As in two
33 Mariner : I'm not sure how that changes anything. mariner
34 Bkircher : What is to replace the 900s then, they have over 30 of them? Honestly I don't see Mesa leaving anytime soon, even with all of their problems. There i
35 Post contains images MaverickM11 : I was definitely there, but my being there or not doesn't change the economics of an aircraft, although I wish it did
36 Mariner : I don't dispute that. I have no idea where you work/have worked, and I have no reason to dispute your employment anywhere. Nor does anything change t
37 Etops1 : i just got confirmation from scott kirby our president via e-mail that "there are no A318's on order and NO plans to ever order them. "
38 Etops1 : technically they are on the books but the company has no obligation to take them and they never will.
39 MaverickM11 : Of course not--all I'm saying is that if the ownership costs are low enough, they make up for the operating costs. I doubt I asked if I already knew.
40 Post contains links Mariner : The post is in the archives - reply #83: http://dm.airliners.net/discussions/...42&s=Frontier+A320+order#ID2618242 "MaverickM11: Do you know the pric
41 MaverickM11 : That was a rhetorical question.
42 Norlander : What is the extra cost of operating a A319 compared to a A318, given same discounts in price and route supporting 100 pax. I.e. A318 working near capa
43 Post contains images Revelation : So why don't they do the conversion already? Are they trying to figure out how many Gallic cheeks they need to kiss to get it done? So there are no d
44 Post contains images Mariner : Funny. That's funny. mariner
45 MaverickM11 : Quoting the last time I proved you wrong is funny interesting or funny ha-ha?
46 Post contains images Mariner : I don;t see that you've proved anything. I made no claim as to what Frontier was paying for the aircraft, and since it was an order for more, I'm not
47 WesternA318 : LOL, and which site WILL you post such said things on? Or a nice handful of new red-eyes from LAS, or even existing ones (LAS-SLC being one, instead
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...
US Airways Shuttle - Still On Sale? posted Wed Jun 16 2004 12:51:53 by Mozart