Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
United Airlines To Buy Both 787 And A350 (#2)  
User currently offlineDiamond From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3279 posts, RR: 63
Posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 22622 times:

This is a continuation of the following thread, archived due to size:

United Airlines To Buy Both 787 And A350 (by AeroPiggot Dec 7 2009 in Civil Aviation)


Blank.
176 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJayeshrulz From India, joined Apr 2007, 1029 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 22571 times:

i really hope they change the way thing are happening with UA.
I hate that reverse business class i traveled in and had a jet lag for about 14-15 hours in reverse!!!!!
really hope to see UA doing BOM/DEL-IAD/JFK route one day...!!



Keep flying, because the sky is no limit!
User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2792 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 22329 times:



Quoting LAXintl (Reply 200):
If the 744 was so profitable, air carriers across the world would not be riding themselves of the model, particuarly in favor of the 77W.

Even being based on 40 year old technology, the 744 is profitable for many carriers on many routes (see, LH, for instance, which operates 30 of them, and not a single 77W), but it is not profitable for some other airlines on some other routes. Size is not the problem. LH has ordered both the 748 and the 388. And I would claim, based on their relative financial performance in the last 10-20 years, that LH knows what it's doing at least as well as UA, AA, DL, etc.

Quoting 474218 (Reply 203):
Just because the A350 has less seats does not mean can't replace a 747. UA determined they would rather fly 280 passengers in a two engine aircraft than 350 passengers in a four engine aircraft. It's not really hard to comprehend?

As it has been pointed out in the first part of the thread, a 359 in the standard UA configuration would seat about 250 people (not 280 as I erroneously said), about as many as the current 772s UA flies. Why would they have these two planes in the system simultaneously? I indeed find it hard to comprehend.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2792 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 22295 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 223):
Not to mention that the route might be more profitable by sending 2 A359s 4 days a week (peak travel days) and a single A359 3 days a week rather than 1 A388 every day.

It would still be more profitable to send one 388 4 days a week, and one 359 three days a week.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2792 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 22285 times:



Quoting Jimbobjoe (Reply 222):
Quoting UALWN (Reply 188):
What's the advantage of sending a 359 and a 788 daily in a route if it can support a 388?

Lower risk.

It is entirely possible that a handful of 748s or A380s *would be* more profitable for United.

But the US airline industry has just been through hell in the last decade, and management have gone risk-averse.

They would rather leave profit on the table in exchange for more certainty, than grab the extra profit from having more seats, at the expense of worrying about the next economic downturn, and having to fly A380s around with 150 passengers..

Thanks for this interesting observation.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26499 posts, RR: 75
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 22243 times:



Quoting UALWN (Reply 3):

It would still be more profitable to send one 388 4 days a week, and one 359 three days a week.

Not when all factors are considered. Like acquisition cost for 2 aircraft as opposed to one, not to mention crew training and scheduling.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineEtoile From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 22218 times:



Quoting UALWN (Reply 3):

It would still be more profitable to send one 388 4 days a week, and one 359 three days a week.

That is not necessarily true. Yields are higher with greater frequency. You are assuming that the difference between the trip costs of 8x 359 over 4x 388 is greater than the aggregate increase in yield.


User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9169 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 22176 times:

I still see them ordering the B 747-8 and/or A 380. Maybe 25-30.

Can't trust them 100%. They claimed that this was 'a winner take all'' order. Now it is a split order between Airbus and Boeing.

These planes will probably replace the B 767s first and maybe some B 757s


User currently offline757GB From Uruguay, joined Feb 2009, 676 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 22097 times:



Quoting United Airline (Reply 7):
I still see them ordering the B 747-8 and/or A 380. Maybe 25-30.

I don't know if it's just wishful thinking on my part, but I agree. It seems that at some point they will need VLAs.



God is The Alpha and The Omega. We come from God. We go towards God. What an Amazing Journey...
User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2792 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 21963 times:



Quoting N1120A (Reply 5):
Not when all factors are considered. Like acquisition cost for 2 aircraft as opposed to one, not to mention crew training and scheduling.

Acquisition costs for two aircraft as opposed to one? I'm certainly not assuming that, in my model, the 388 and 350 would be left siting idle during their off days: they would just be deployed to other routes! Additional crew training costs for two sizable sub-fleets are negligible. As for scheduling costs, I don't know what you mean there.



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2792 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 21945 times:



Quoting Etoile (Reply 6):
Yields are higher with greater frequency.

Can you prove this? We are talking about 1xday vs. 2xday. Does it really make a difference in yield? For many routes, there's actually only one time window available. See all the US East Coast to Europe flights leaving within a couple of hours of 7 pm EST. Does it really help the yield to have a flight at 6pm and another at 9pm, vs. one at 7:30 pm operated with a bigger equipment?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 21970 times:



Quoting 757GB (Reply 8):
Quoting United Airline (Reply 7):
I still see them ordering the B 747-8 and/or A 380. Maybe 25-30.

I don't know if it's just wishful thinking on my part, but I agree. It seems that at some point they will need VLAs.

 checkmark 

United did not order the 777-300ER or an improved version. Combined with phasing out 747-400s IMo this leaves the door wide open for a future VLA order.

As Ikramerica says there's no hurry & they have time to sit on the fence a little longer, the 744s aint so bad as some say & the last ones will leave the fleet in.. 9 yrs?

Meanwhile the 744s / 772ER's will remain UA's Pacific back bone for yrs to come..



User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4739 posts, RR: 39
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 21898 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Keesje (Reply 11):
As Ikramerica says there's no hurry & they have time to sit on the fence a little longer, the 744s aint so bad as some say & the last ones will leave the fleet in.. 9 yrs?

The B747-400 is surpassed in efficiency, but for sure that does not make it a bad plane indeed. I am still happy to fly on one and airlines operating them can still make a profit out of flying these beautiful 4-holers.

Let's hope they will go in a couple of years time for the A380 and/or B748i. That would be great.  Smile But it is also great that UA has finally started their fleet renewal regarding the larger airplanes they operate.  Smile


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6920 posts, RR: 63
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 21838 times:



Quoting EPA001 (Reply 12):
But it is also great that UA has finally started their fleet renewal

Now they just need to do something about that awful colour scheme... !  stirthepot 


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4739 posts, RR: 39
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 21752 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting PM (Reply 13):
Now they just need to do something about that awful colour scheme... !

Maybe so (I liked the old one better). But you can not complain about UA because you "got them to order RR engines" with their A350's.  bigthumbsup  (Not that they had much of a choice  Wink).


User currently offlineCws818 From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1176 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 21743 times:



Quoting United Airline (Reply 7):
I still see them ordering the B 747-8 and/or A 380. Maybe 25-30.

They very well might just do so. When does your crystal ball show such an order happening?



volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
User currently offlineSumsonic From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 21525 times:

Nice to be back on A-Net again......

Interesting thread regarding this order that was split by only this US carrier. So, either UA's Management team knows something that no one else in the US industry knows, or it is bone-headed decision.

What is hard to understand, is why not choose one type with different versions. The A350-900 is pretty much the same as the 787-9 (slightly less capacity) in terms of performance. The A350-800 (slightly more capacity) is pretty much the same as the 787-8 in performance.

Just some thoughts:

1. This is a one for one replacement order for 767 and 744 as stated by the company. There will be no increase in frequency from these new birds, but a big decrease of capacity on routes flown by 744. United continues to apply the shrink to profitability strategy that has worked really well so far (sorry, a bit of sarcasm there)
2. Despite fragmentation, a case can be made for some larger gauge aircraft on particular routes (SFO-FRA is a good example that someone posted) - downline option conversion for A350-1000 perhaps. Given the shrinkage of the company, UA will not be taking on any VLAs.
3. However, if current costs of 744 are an issue, why not go with 77W in the next 2-3 years, you only need 18 to 20 frames, keep premium seating as is 12F and 53C, cut economy, but shave 30% in DOC. This provides near term savings, commonality with current 777 fleet and reduces the widebody fleet from 3 (763/777/744) to 2 (788 or A358 and 777). This should be good enough for the next 10 years or so. Then you replace the 777 fleet with larger versions of the ordered models and you can cut that down to 1 fleet type.
4. Lastly, and I have no knowledge of it, but this could simply be a hedge on who UA will eventually get in bed with. These orders are so far in the future that if the partner is US, then 788 order never sees the light of day. If it is CO, then the A350 order never sees light of day


User currently offlineSumsonic From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 21456 times:



Quoting UALWN (Reply 10):
UALWN From Spain, joined Jun 2009, 280 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted Wed Dec 9 2009 04:13:01 your local time (1 hour 53 minutes 58 secs ago) and read 427 times:




Quoting Etoile (Reply 6):
Yields are higher with greater frequency.

Can you prove this? We are talking about 1xday vs. 2xday. Does it really make a difference in yield? For many routes, there's actually only one time window available. See all the US East Coast to Europe flights leaving within a couple of hours of 7 pm EST. Does it really help the yield to have a flight at 6pm and another at 9pm, vs. one at 7:30 pm operated with a bigger equipment?

Do not have the numbers in front of me, but UA flying JFK-LHR with 3 daily flight was a good example of this versus BA and AA sked of multiple dailies. UA consistently underperformed on yield despite a pretty comparable product. The big driver of this underperformance was lack of corporate traffic because of lack of sked strength, followed by lack of connectivity on either end of the leg.


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6920 posts, RR: 63
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 21441 times:



Quoting Sumsonic (Reply 16):
The A350-900 is pretty much the same as the 787-9 (slightly less capacity) in terms of performance. The A350-800 (slightly more capacity) is pretty much the same as the 787-8 in performance.

Why do people keep making this mistake?

Ignore the -8/-800, -9/-900 issue. The numbers don't correspond.

The 787-8 has no direct A350 equivalent.

The 787-9 and the A350-800 are very similar in terms of seating and MTOW.

The A350-900 has no direct 787 equivalent.

So if UA want latest-technology planes of 787-8s size and A350-900s size then one family won't satisfy their needs and they will split the order.

Which they have done.


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 21326 times:



Quoting PM (Reply 18):
So if UA want latest-technology planes of 787-8s size and A350-900s size then one family won't satisfy their needs and they will split the order.

Which they have done.

Not to mention that, if in 10 years, UAL decides that they were made a mistake with one aircraft or the other, they have enough options to rectify their mistake. I'm sure that those options would transfer nicely to a hypothetical 787-10, or potential Airbus airliner smaller than the A350.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineSumsonic From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 21251 times:



Quoting PM (Reply 18):
Why do people keep making this mistake?

Ignore the -8/-800, -9/-900 issue. The numbers don't correspond.

The 787-8 has no direct A350 equivalent.

The 787-9 and the A350-800 are very similar in terms of seating and MTOW.

The A350-900 has no direct 787 equivalent.

So if UA want latest-technology planes of 787-8s size and A350-900s size then one family won't satisfy their needs and they will split the order.

Which they have done.

This is not as clear as you present it. The MTOW is as you point out, but the seating density is not. The A350 is densed out with 9 across in Economy in all specs. The 787 is densed out with 8 across in Economy in the low end and 9 across in the high end. As such, if both planes are densed out with 9 across, the A358 falls between 788 and 789, while the A359 sits 30 seats or so above the 789 and those seats are in economy not premium.

The MTOW will come into play in range performance, but since both the 789 and A359 specs have them reaching 8K fully loaded, it doesn't appear that range would be an issue.

If UA only cares about the "latest technology" then why not place a bigger order, get a better deal (more planes = less per plane), and plan to replace the 777 fleet while you are at it.


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6920 posts, RR: 63
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 20934 times:



Quoting Sumsonic (Reply 20):
If UA only cares about the "latest technology" then why not place a bigger order, get a better deal (more planes = less per plane), and plan to replace the 777 fleet while you are at it.

They have.

They've ordered 50 widebodies and taken purchase rights on another 100.

They will be replacing 777s.

They've said that their widebody fleet will be just 787s and A350s.


User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 20832 times:



Quoting Sumsonic (Reply 20):
This is not as clear as you present it. The MTOW is as you point out, but the seating density is not. The A350 is densed out with 9 across in Economy in all specs. The 787 is densed out with 8 across in Economy in the low end and 9 across in the high end. As such, if both planes are densed out with 9 across, the A358 falls between 788 and 789, while the A359 sits 30 seats or so above the 789 and those seats are in economy not premium.

Which numbers for seating do you use? Because the OEM numbers work with different F/J/Y ratios. Comparing the cabin area would probably be a better measure, does anyone have the numbers or a link where I can find them? Google didn't work for me  Sad.



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently onlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2792 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 20774 times:



Quoting Sumsonic (Reply 17):
Do not have the numbers in front of me, but UA flying JFK-LHR with 3 daily flight was a good example of this versus BA and AA sked of multiple dailies. UA consistently underperformed on yield despite a pretty comparable product. The big driver of this underperformance was lack of corporate traffic because of lack of sked strength, followed by lack of connectivity on either end of the leg.

You're probably right, but I might argue that JFK-LHR is a pretty unique market. By the way, how is VS doing, yield-wise, in this route? Most days they only have two flights in each direction using a 744 and a 346 (plus two more flights to/from EWR with 744 and 343).



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 20517 times:

From previous thread, quoting JRDC930:

"same thing can be said of large parts of the world where superior quality airlines operate. Its really the fact that US carriers simply arent well managed and even when they are never really have cared about customer satisfaction, even for business class. In the US they have a monopoly on fast transportation as there is no real rail system to compete, as such they excercise monopoly power, and that includes offering a "take it or leave it" product which is usually crap."


It really has nothing to do with mismanagement. WN is pretty bare bones with cabin amenities (when compared to DL, CO, B6, and others that have live TV) yet people (including me) love to fly them. Americans are more cost sensitive than service sensitive. The market has proven time and time again that American passengers will not pay for a better product. AA tried the more leg room in coach campaign and it failed. US based airlines removed food service from flights when they discovered that people simply don't care.

It has nothing to do with "take it or leave it," our market simply will not support high class service. US passengers will go through all kinds of hassle just to save $10 on a ticket. We were the nation that invented the LCC.

It has nothing to do with a lack of a rail system. If/when high speed rail becomes a reality in the US it will be just as bare bones as the airlines.


25 Sumsonic : Agree, the ratio of F/J/Y will vary by carrier, hence why UA flies their 777 with something like 270 capacity versus what Boeing puts out as 301 in 3
26 Scorpy : I know its fashionable on this board to think that every airline needs a VLA, but I don't know how much more clear UA could be on their fleet planning
27 Funkywabit : I bet this had to do with financing.... IIRC NW did the same thing with CRJ9 and the EMB175
28 Incitatus : Actually not. On a few routes, in one direction, there is big preference for an overnight flight, like from SIN to Europe. But in the reverse directi
29 Stitch : If UA enters into a marketing and revenue-sharing agreement across the Pacific (say with NH and OZ) like they have with LH across the Atlantic, UA may
30 United Airline : I don't think they said that. Even if they did, they can still change their mind. They once said it would be a winner take all deal but it's not. The
31 EPA001 : I think they have said so. See below: Of course, anyone can change its mind. Or the market situation can change. But for now they only see the A350-9
32 Pnwtraveler : You can tell people who post on Anet who have no business experience, when they constantly look at only the efficiency and "newness" of aircraft as th
33 MogandoCI : yes, and no UA has 5 hubs, true - SFO, LAX, DEN, ORD, IAD but it's clear that SFO is the preferred Asian Pacific gateway, so therefore on routes with
34 Sumsonic : But you need to wait until the end of the line before you receive them while others are flying circles around you. With delivery dates between 2016 a
35 UALWN : Chicago, Boston, DC to where? To London? I don't see huge frequencies in those routes by any given airline. And yet you find things like UA and LH se
36 Cubsrule : By the time these aircraft arrive, Japan will have far more capacity than demand, though there may be some desire for VLAs for HND depending on how t
37 UALWN : But we do see many many other airlines use 744s at LHR. Airlines that are at least as financially "healthy" as DL and UA. I just don't believe that t
38 FlyPNS1 : UA flies IAD-LHR 3-4x daily depending on season. UA flies ORD-LHR 3-4x daily depending on season. In both these markets, UA has a morning departure,
39 474218 : But earlier in the press release UA said: Quote: "United expects to take delivery of the aircraft between 2016 and 2019; at the same time it will ret
40 Ikramerica : Exactly. And the statement here does not expressly say that these aircraft will replace 747s. Only that, AT THE SAME TIME, they will retire internati
41 United787 : In short, UA doesn't need the 787s as soon as AA. AA has older 762s to get rid of + no replacement for the A300s they just retired. Has AA even firme
42 EA772LR : As much as I would like to see a 748I or an A380 in UA colors, I agree with you here. I think there are various reasons UA operates and has operated
43 Cubsrule : Sure - but look at UA's competition BA is TRIPLE daily at IAD and does not use a 744. They are double daily to ORD and do not use a 744. SFO and LAX
44 DocLightning : I disagree. The only U.S. carriers that ordered 744's are UA and NW. Neither airline has shown any interest in a replacement, whether 77W's or A380's
45 LDVAviation : By the terms of their "exclusive provider" deal with Boeing, AA has until 18 months before the first delivery to finalize the order. They are proceed
46 UALWN : Exactly. I was just told that UA missed out in JFK-LHR because it only offered triple daily. High frequency meant 6 per day... Yet most of the carrie
47 Cubsrule : There is no route LHR-USA on which the carrier using a 747 does not have the most frequency. The difference that you are missing is the competitivene
48 UALWN : And what does this prove (assuming it is correct)?
49 Cubsrule : It suggests that VLAs aren't a good strategy when you are in a frequency fight with another carrier, as UA and DL generally are.
50 Stitch : Not at all. On the flip side, their decisions are not de facto the only correct ones.
51 FlyPNS1 : They're not wrong, but most of them only have one hub. They have no choice but to concentrate all their traffic which requires bigger planes. For lar
52 FL787 : No but they also are almost all focused on just one hub. If UA just had one big hub (like EK and DXB, AF at CDG, SQ at SIN) then it might make sense.
53 Cubsrule : Six gateways, actually (add HNL and SEA).
54 Airbazar : NYC-LHR is an exception to the rule. There are very few medium/long haul city pairs that justify or can support the kind of frequencies that you see
55 474218 : You are reading things that are not there. If I was to do that; I would read it that the A350's and 787's would replace the international 747's and 7
56 United Airline : And things change from time to time in aviation
57 Jayeshrulz : They have the oldest 777 ones at 1996 IIRC, so in 2016, the 777's will be 20 years. I think you maybe right.They should take up more 77W's to replace
58 Ikramerica : Funny how vague statements can be read multiple ways. It's almost as if PR people write them that way intentionally. Oh, wait, they do...
59 Revelation : So if I try to interpret what is being said here, UA is at a disadvantage to many major international airlines because it has to operate 5+ hubs to ge
60 EPA001 : If they would not do so, we could not be speculating here. Where does that leave all he fun?
61 Post contains links ATTart : Here is an article regarding the financing of the deal.. http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=342913&src=109
62 Post contains images Keesje : You're on the high side, in reality some United 777-200ER's have 249 seats, some 253. The A350-900 is a little narrower. It has entirely different ca
63 FL787 : It's not a disadvantage. It's just how US carriers have to operate because the US is so spread out. Going back to hub and spoke? The hub and spoke sy
64 FlyPNS1 : I think a much greater urban legend is that every big airline must have a VLA. It's driven largely by emotion and enthusiasts who just like big plane
65 Pnwtraveler : Silly North American airlines. The EK model should be imposed and the public be forced to travel the way some Anetters say because that is best. Cana
66 UA772IAD : I read the entire first thread and didn't comment, but I'll say a few things. Disclaimer: at the moment, I don't have the time or the resources (well
67 Dfambro : This "legend" comes right from the airlines themselves. Outside of UA and their 744s (and a measly two from Northwest), no major US carrier has order
68 Revelation : I see that point, but still, UA is maintaining 5 major hubs and some focus cities whereas many international airlines like LH, BA, AF-KL, EK, SQ, QF,
69 FlyPNS1 : But think about this. What if UA decides to also offer MEL-LAX using an A359? Most of those passengers flying SFO-SYD-MEL and LAX-SYD-MEL would now b
70 474218 : I sometimes get in trouble because because I believe "words have meaning" so I try not to read things into what is written. This comes from 20 plus y
71 DC8FanJet : This order is still very fluid. Deliveries are a long way off, with lots of flexibilty on models actually delivered. I think United is going to see ho
72 Post contains links Bioyuki : Looks like UA got a better deal than initially reported: Tilton also said he was seeing a gradual, steady improvement in the corporate and internation
73 Incitatus : That is not the hurdle for ULH. The hurdle to make ULHs work is the high cost of operation often cannot be covered because of a very competitive pric
74 Cubsrule : It's largely the same story at NRT. The 359/787 allows them to reach places like BKK and SNN on their own metal, nonstop (the 359 can even do ORD-BKK
75 UA772IAD : And the competetive pricing and proliferation of connecting points arguably comes from the fact that most people prefer to break up ULH trips where t
76 Astuteman : Makes me wonder on here sometimes.... Am I the only one who thinks that the REAL driver of fragmentation has been narrowbodies and regionals - their
77 UA772IAD : This seems to fall more under the marketing premise by the manufacturer that won't play out in reality. If the hometown carriers are struggling on th
78 Flighty : Strategy. This way, they have both Boeing and Airbus directly competing for the next marginal airframe. United wants to dual-source so they get the c
79 EPA001 : Sharp analysis Astuteman. I think it sounds very plausible. The numbers of A320's and B737-NG's flying around are unbelievable if you compare them to
80 Mariner : Or the long range narrowbody? If Airbus could have given the A321 TATL range a few years ago..... To an extant, perhaps. But both manufacturers are w
81 Cubsrule : It's hard to tell - we know that UA is already carrying some passengers to those places today, and to a place like BKK, they probably don't get a hug
82 UA772IAD : I alluded to this. The domestic market has seen fragmenation, based on how it has been defined, for a longer period of time than the international ma
83 Flighty : Point well taken, but how can you ignore United....? Getting half the United fleet is still tremendous. And, each sale is a conquest for Airbus. As y
84 Mariner : An important jewel in the crown. mariner
85 Aircellist : This is not honest, IMHO. If you need to be at Canary Wharf by 9 am, you must catch the 6pm flight, end of discussion. Else, you may really prefer th
86 474218 : Icelandair has been using the 757 transatlantic in the early 1990's.
87 Cubsrule : But, of course, all people don't need to at their destinations at 0100. If my meeting is at 1400, I'm not going to catch the 1800 flight, end of disc
88 UA772IAD : They are trendsetters, indeed. But to think that US legacy carriers would use it on routes from their hubs to Mainland Europe, quite a bit further th
89 DocLightning : It's not really an urban legend. It's based on the observation that since the 744, no US airline has ordered anything larger than a 772. And those 74
90 Luvflng : If the A350 becomes the staple long haul fleet replacing 747's and is also adopted to replace, (by 2016-2019 time frame) aging 777's, then UA thinks i
91 RJpieces : I don't understand everyone's hold-up over VLA aircraft. With the number of options United has, isn't it likely that they will exercise some for A350-
92 UA772IAD : I agree. And I agree. Its far too early for anyone to definitively say that 300 seats will be the max.
93 Stitch : It is likely more correct to say that UA thinks that their share of international traffic will be shrinking. And even then, that might not truly be t
94 UA772IAD : Very good point, but will the "lack" of service offered by NH or OZ compensate? LH serves all of UA hubs, plus many many other cities (PDX, LAX, SEA,
95 Incitatus : I said that I do not think this anecdotal preference is a factor. Passenger preference in this case is guided by price and preference for nonstops. C
96 LAXintl : If you have not noticed United has steadily shifted its Pacific operations more and more in favor of smaller 777s. At one time NRT was an all 747 sta
97 UALWN : I'm unable to deduce that from your quoted fact that "There is no route LHR-USA on which the carrier using a 747 does not have the most frequency ."
98 Sumsonic : I think the case of downgauging by DL and UA can be more attributed to shrinking of the airlines. UA especially has killed its feeder gauge. They've
99 Sumsonic : I believe there is a formula to divide the revenue. I think it is ASK based.
100 Airbazar : An exception nonetheless. Anything over 10-12 hours, in my book. There are very few city pairs (if any), in that domain that required the kind of sta
101 UALWN : That would make sense, and it would invalidate what was mentioned in reply #93:
102 AirNZ : If you state they are trying to reduce capacity, then they don't need to order more 359's as you also state. Such is a contradiction.
103 UALWN : Have you read what I was replying to? If you haven't, do it, please. If you have, well, try again.
104 Bmacleod : Big day for Airbus as they make historic a widebody breakthrough with United's order as up to now United only had A319/320s. UA becomes only the secon
105 Scorpy : I'm not sure this is the case. rather, I see them continuing moving traffic away from trunk routes such as FRA, NRT to more non-stop routings, as wel
106 UALWN : But, again, in order to be able to do any of this, they would need to order more aircraft than the pure one-to-one replacement they announced.
107 Stitch : I've been told it's straight down the middle, but that information did not come from UA's or LH's CFOs, so... *shrug* They do have 100 options in han
108 Cubsrule : Look at AA, though. They are supposedly replacing S80s with 738s one-for-one. That does not mean that every time a 738 comes, an S80 goes to the dese
109 Sumsonic : I heard it from UA RM, but then with the new combined AC/CO/LH/UA JV over the Atlantic, I guess it is a quarter share for each one.
110 Jayeshrulz : Will there be new F and J product? I hope they do..coz i'm sick of their J and Y.
111 FlyPNS1 : But look at it this way, right now UA is using 21 763ER's and only about 16-18 of their 744's, so that's only about 37-39 planes in use. If they repl
112 UALWN : Getting there . I think I see your point now, but I still don't find it very compelling. It's basically anecdotal evidence. Given enough effort, I mi
113 Cubsrule : Go ahead - if you look at routes US carriers fly, I don't think you'll find many where the carrier with the VLA is not the frequency leader.
114 FlyPNS1 : Unless I missed it somewhere, United only discusses a reduction in "average seat count." All that means is that the average United widebody plane wil
115 Stitch : UA just installed a new First Class and Business Class product on their 767 and 747 fleets. It will start being installed on the 777 fleet early next
116 UALWN : Well, this is the quote: "United expects to take delivery of the aircraft between 2016 and 2019; at the same time it will retire its international Bo
117 Olympic472 : The debate continues about VLAs. In one form or other, what I write here may have been stated above by others. I'll just say my piece anyway. When we
118 UALWN : Are you therefore suggesting that BA, VS, LH, AF, EK, EY, KE, CX, SQ, QF, etc. don't know where the money is? Based on past financial performances, I
119 Evomutant : They know where the money is for them. Which maybe different from those airlines you mentioned. The UA statement suggests that they intend to move ou
120 Olympic472 : evomutant: Thanks for the response to UALWN. The whole airline business has changed and there are more than one view out there. I won't say it is com
121 UA772IAD : Of course. It's hard not to notice. The 359 is compariable in size to the 777, the 787-8 is closer to the 67. My point was, Stitch was emphasizing th
122 Astuteman : At least you can safely say that you do... About 2 years time....... It's way too soon to tell how accurate Boeing's forecast is, by the way.. That,
123 UALWN : I fully agree with both of you. I was trying to reply to blanket statements of the sort of "frequency is king" and "RIP VLA." Clearly these statement
124 EA772LR : I'm not sure what people are waiting for in the A380 in order for it to gain more orders. I've said it in other threads, and I'll say it again in thi
125 United Airline : If UA merges with US or CO things can be different. They can still order the A 380 and the B 747-8 for the busiest routes and use the others for expan
126 Post contains links Olympic472 : http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...20To%20Replace%20737s&channel=comm Now UA is looking at the Bombardier C Series for their narrow-body replaceme
127 United Airline : I think: The A 321 and the B 787 will replace the B 757. New A 319/320 will replace the current A 319/320s. The C series will be replaced by maybe som
128 Jambrain : I read it the other way "these 50 aircraft will reduce the average seat count ... by 10% ... over the .. international fleet" says nothing about tota
129 UALWN : It does say something about total seats in the sense that it mentions 50 aircraft. If they were to replace, say, 100 aircraft, then the average seat
130 GymClassHero : Does anyone else notice the double standard United has with Boeing vs. Airbus? To United the 77L/77W/747-8I are "old technology" but the same-era A321
131 BMI727 : I think that it was a bargaining ploy through the media. Also see Michael O'Leary and Scott Boras. That is an awful lot of money for a plane they don
132 FlyingAY : Is there a newer product available in A321s category?
133 LAXintl : Actualy No. United has been vocal that is wants a new technology narrowbody that can deliver atleast a 15% improvement over current designs, however
134 Post contains images GymClassHero : So? Just hunker down with the aircraft you've got and wait - AA is doing it, DL is doing it, US is doing it (CO's 757s are younger, so I don't think
135 Flighty : UA also knows that the ideal replacement for 767 is the 787. Not the A350. The 787 will be a better aircraft for certain UA missions.
136 Scbriml : Why would UA do that? They have shareholders to worry about. The sentiment reminds me of a former member of this site who was convinced SQ only order
137 Mariner : I wish you hadn't said "we" - because I don't. Unless there is some reason why I absolutely positively have to be there - which isn't all that often
138 Aircellist : Mariner, you are talking about the kind of voyage I prefer... Except I don't have the money to travel up front. But if I can make many stops, I will!
139 Mariner : I think that beats anything I've ever done, but I once flew from MEL to LAX - via Brisbane, Noumea, Nauru, Guam and Honolulu. I accept it is a little
140 Olympic472 : Let see if United orders the A321. You may have a point here
141 Mariner : Perhaps because, as United has said, it is the bottom of the economic cycle for airlines to purchase aircraft. From Air New Zealand to Frontier, airl
142 Olympic472 : "We" refers to partners and myself, not all A.netters. However I do agree with your point too, and have done so myself. We just do not know the numbe
143 AirNz : I know exactly what you were replying to and have no need to re-read your comments, which were merely an assumption with no factual basis. You are as
144 Mariner : I have a few stories like that, too, but I tend to lie back and enjoy them. I've had some fun experiences that way and I've never lost a job because
145 Columba : First, UA never referred to the 747-8I and 77L as old technology. They see no need for these aircraft right now (same can be said about the A380). Th
146 Cubsrule : I don't know that that's true. With a fleet of, say, 50 frames, the savings from commonality with the rest of the narrowbodies would not be that grea
147 Stitch : True, but it doesn't, so. The A321-200 can also lift more total payload weight and fly farther at MZFW than the 737-900ER, so it really is the better
148 Cubsrule : Correct. My point was this: UA will buy the better airplane for them. If that's the 321, it's the 321, but with as many as they'll need, commonality
149 BMI727 : There is a third option: keep the 757s. This might be the best route for a lot of airlines, especially ones that are tight on cash and financing. The
150 Cubsrule : I don't think we'll see the complete retirement of the 75 from any US airline's fleet in the next ten years. The 757 has a niche, and there are plent
151 Pnwtraveler : Don't forget if the capacity sharing/bed getting into formalizes across Atlantic you will have much better utilization of aircraft by the members. It
152 FRNT787 : Like a nice flight of mine from DFW-SNA...through EWR... Anyways, I am always disappointed when AA is the cheapest from DFW-SNA, because that means I
153 GymClassHero : Yeah, the 757 is older, and less efficient, but with winglets (which all US majors are utilizing), it is only a single-digit burn deficit when compar
154 UALWN : I understand all that, thank you very much. What I still fail to understand is your comment before: There was no contradiction.
155 Etoile : Sumsonic's data would be best. It's hard to intuit the yield issue, but consider the following: - The airline product is not just to get to a destina
156 Post contains images Keesje : I think Airbus will keep UA updated. If a new production planning is made they just inform them they are freezing 2015/16 production slots & if they
157 Gemuser : But we are talking about the A380 and LHR-JFK is just about the shortest route the A380 would be deployed on (training and between long haul routes e
158 Incitatus : The number of protons in the oxygen atom NEVER changes. Boeing can make decisons on how to stuff an airframe with air, confident that it does not hav
159 FRNT787 : I completely agree, and I believe Boeing will do the same. I dont believe UA has counted either VLA out yet, there statements to me seem to indicate
160 Post contains links Revelation : The winglet thing is already a major change for the A320 family. Here's a quote: Ref: http://www.ainonline.com/news/single...take-a-nice-bite-out-of-
161 EA772LR : The A321/739ER are the latest tech aircraft available in their market, with no replacement on the foreseeable horizon. And with the extensive fleet o
162 RJpieces : Any renderings of what the United A-350 might look like?!!!
163 Hloutweg : You may find one here. No the very best in my view, but something to give you an idea. I'd wait for the contracts to be finalized to see the official
164 Revelation : I agree - the A321 with winglets available in 2013 or so would be very interesting to UA.
165 EA772LR : I saw one the other day, but I can't find the link now If I find it, I'll post it.
166 Post contains links United1 : Probably not the one your talking about EA but heres one I found... http://www.cardatabase.net/modifieda...earch/photo_search.php?id=00011713
167 Post contains links VirginFlyer : http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/ai.../2009/12/united-a350-and-b787.html V/F
168 Gemuser : So what? A major change in conditions will have bad/good effects on all airlines. 1) Some routes will never be "frequency kings" due to the physical
169 EA772LR : " target=_blank>http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/ai....html There's the one. Thanks V/F for posting that Both planes look great.
170 Astuteman : So which one's which? Rgds
171 Etoile : Agreed that, for instance, CX probably doesn't see improved passenger yields from running two daily 747s around midnight to LHR. They just need a big
172 Incitatus : If the airline flying 500 seats at a time wants to continue to fly them it will lose big money. The airline flying two bundles of 250 seats has a lot
173 Cubsrule : MIA-GRU actually highlights another interesting problem, which is that the aircraft that operates at the most desirable timeslot (i.e. the hypothetic
174 UALWN : I posted this earlier in this thread: Here you have a single city pair in which there are multiple 744s flying within an hour in both directions. I b
175 Mbj2000 : You're joking, but you're right. It will be hard to distinguish them, easiest is to look at the cockpit windows and the nose... I guess. Cheers
176 Gemuser : Any route (NOT sector) over about 12-14 hours, all routes over about 16-18 hours. There are various factors at play. Some specific examples: See 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...
United Airlines To Buy Both 787 And A350 posted Mon Dec 7 2009 19:45:42 by AeroPiggot
United Airlines To BUY Air Canada A330 posted Fri Oct 22 1999 05:13:25 by FLY777UA
US Airlines To Indonesia: Past, Present And Future posted Tue Oct 20 2009 04:13:16 by 777law
Boeing To Buy Vought's 787 Operations posted Wed Jul 1 2009 10:44:24 by Racko
Hainan Airlines To Buy Boeing & Airbus Planes posted Wed Apr 29 2009 21:51:06 by Cartenz
Marketing Gimmicks On The 787 And A350? posted Wed Apr 1 2009 11:43:00 by CEO@AFG
Hainan Airlines To Apply For DUS And HNL posted Tue Mar 10 2009 16:34:45 by B742
Who Are The First Airlines To Recieve Their 787's? posted Thu Aug 21 2008 11:20:54 by Virginblue4
United Airlines To Scrap RDU-Denver Flight posted Fri Jun 13 2008 08:12:07 by ThegreatRDU
Aires To Buy 20 Q400s And More posted Fri May 23 2008 10:49:50 by RCS763AV