Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Comes Of UA's Airbus Fleet If Merged W/ CO?  
User currently offlinecraigpc01 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 31 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18892 times:

With all this talk of UA and CO being the 'real' merger, I got to wondering what would come of UA's A320 family and their orders for the A350 if they merged with CO, given their allegiance with Boeing?

99 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineN670UW From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1606 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18908 times:

Probably nothing. The fleet is large enough (around 150 aircraft) and serves an important role in the network that it probably wouldn't go anywhere in the merged carrier's fleet.

Just as NW's Airbus fleet is sticking around with post-merger Delta (which was also all-Boeing/McD pre-merger).


User currently offlinecraigpc01 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 31 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18894 times:

But what about the A350 orders UA just announced? There would be plenty of time to change that, and given CO would likely be manning the ship it begs the question...

User currently onlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 23218 posts, RR: 20
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18744 times:

Quoting craigpc01 (Reply 2):
There would be plenty of time to change that, and given CO would likely be manning the ship it begs the question...

Why? Does Boeing have a better airplane for that mission?



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlinesancho99504 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18722 times:

Quoting craigpc01 (Reply 2):

I think CO will keep the 25 firm ordered A350's as well as the options. It would give them a chance to test the aircraft at UA's expense, and who knows, CO may even like the A350 as the A359 is a perfect 77E replacement.



kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out-USMC
User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5947 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18699 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3):
Why? Does Boeing have a better airplane for that mission?

I think it depends on the what management team remains after a UA/CO merger. If it's the CO management team, then it's entirely possible that the A350 order could be cancelled. If the UA management team remains, then I think it might stay as a split order.


User currently offlineOA412 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 5349 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 18660 times:

I don't think they'd go anywhere. The recent DL/NW merger is a good example of a mixed fleet that works just fine for the combined airline.

Quoting craigpc01 (Reply 2):
and given CO would likely be manning the ship it begs the question...

I wonder why people keep thinking this will be the case? Yes there was chatter there for a while saying this would be so, but it was rumor and no more. I find it hard to believe that much larger UA's management would step aside and let CO run the show.



Hughes Airwest - Top Banana In The West
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18625 times:

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 5):

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 3):
Why? Does Boeing have a better airplane for that mission?

I think it depends on the what management team remains after a UA/CO merger. If it's the CO management team, then it's entirely possible that the A350 order could be cancelled. If the UA management team remains, then I think it might stay as a split order.

That's probably what's going to happen. UA can cancel either order in advance w/out any penalties.

The A32X and B73NG's will stay but if CO management takes over, the A32X fleet will probably be eventually phased out.

Also, quite a bit depends on what Boeing does with the B787 and B77NG program.



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlinesancho99504 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18572 times:

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 5):

CO is under new management, plus they already have aircraft on order in the time frame the A350's will be delivered. As of right now, CO has no reason to cancel the A350 order as UA has already invested a good amount of $$$ on the order. CO will take up the 25 on order, but the 50 options might be in doubt in CO comes to find the A350 does not perform.



kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out-USMC
User currently offlinedl767captain From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18519 times:

Probably a lot like DL and the NW A320s. The fleet is large enough to keep around and put to use for a while. They can't exactly sell them off, they need them to keep existing routes going. I imagine they would later be replaced by a next gen 737 whenever that comes out but they would still be useful. I would find it more interesting to see what CO would do with the 747s

User currently offlinerjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18444 times:

I don't think the Airbus fleet would go anywhere. As for the A-350 order, it would be a perfect eventual replacement for the 777 fleets of both airlines. Boeing does not yet have a product to compete with it.

User currently offlineAmerican 767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3947 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18406 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting dl767captain (Reply 9):
I would find it more interesting to see what CO would do with the 747s

I think that by the time the merger takes place, if it ever happens, the 747's will be on their way out.
What will be interesting is what will happen with the combined 757 fleet, a mixture of PW and RR powered aircraft. When DL and NW merged a year ago or so both had PW powered 757s in their respective fleets but UA and CO use different power plants in their 757 fleets, PW and RR respectively.

Ben Soriano



Ben Soriano
User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5581 posts, RR: 28
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18392 times:

Quoting wedgetail737 (Reply 5):
If the UA management team remains, then I think it might stay as a split order.

Laughable notion, that (the UA management remaining, not the Airbus order).

Quoting OA412 (Reply 6):

Quoting craigpc01 (Reply 2):
and given CO would likely be manning the ship it begs the question...

I wonder why people keep thinking this will be the case? Yes there was chatter there for a while saying this would be so, but it was rumor and no more. I find it hard to believe that much larger UA's management would step aside and let CO run the show.

What's hard to fathom would be the notion of CO's management, operating a well-run and respected carrier, opting to merge with perpetually-failing United and entertaining even the faintest thought of doing so under UAL's profoundly inept management.

Ask any long-term UAL team member whom they'd prefer to have running a merged CO-UA - big hint: the winner ain't in Chicago!



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15812 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18370 times:

Quoting craigpc01 (Thread starter):

The answer to your question is probably the same thing that is happening to the NW Airbus fleet, namely they are being used more or less as they had before until such time that they need to be replaced and the airline will go from their. The fleet is large enough that there is little to no penalty for a mixed fleet.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18347 times:

Quoting sancho99504 (Reply 8):
as UA has already invested a good amount of $$$ on the order.

That's factually incorrect. In fact, UA has paid some of the less amounts amongst any carriers in deposits for both the B787 and A350. Also, UA can basically cancel either order with a full refund.

Quoting rjpieces (Reply 10):
I don't think the Airbus fleet would go anywhere. As for the A-350 order, it would be a perfect eventual replacement for the 777 fleets of both airlines. Boeing does not yet have a product to compete with it.

Boeing won't be sitting around for too long letting Airbus eat Boeings' B77E lunch.



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6961 posts, RR: 63
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18323 times:

Quoting sancho99504 (Reply 8):
the 50 options might be in doubt in CO comes to find the A350 does not perform.

If the A350 does not perform then the options will certainly be in doubt whoever is running the airline.


User currently offlinewedgetail737 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 5947 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 18235 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

To start...I thought US Airways and UA were engaged in merger talks right now???

User currently offlinenws2002 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 913 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 18229 times:

Quoting OA412 (Reply 6):
I wonder why people keep thinking this will be the case? Yes there was chatter there for a while saying this would be so, but it was rumor and no more. I find it hard to believe that much larger UA's management would step aside and let CO run the show.

I think CO will take the lead, because that's been the dealbreaker all along. I don't think ALL of the UA management is going to step aside though, there will be a blending going on and many will remain.

I'm not so sure that CO will cancel the A350 order. While having an all-Boeing or all-Airbus fleet seems like a great thing for commonality reasons, you still have to keep a large variety of spares for each type, and train your crews to handle each type and variant. When you already have 4 (soon to be 5) main types, with several variants, what's the difficulty with adding a few more?


User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8912 posts, RR: 12
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 18187 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):

The answer to your question is probably the same thing that is happening to the NW Airbus fleet, namely they are being used more or less as they had before until such time that they need to be replaced and the airline will go from their. The fleet is large enough that there is little to no penalty for a mixed fleet.

Indeed - there's an economy of scale already in that UA operates over 150 Airbus narrowbodies already, so the mixed fleet isn't as big a deal as it seems. If anything, some fleet efficiencies could be realized down the line.

The A350 is a bigger question. There's a difference between having 150 planes already in the fleet, and introducing an entire new type.

A post UA/CO merger would really only add the A319/A320 to the CO roster immediately, making the mainline fleet be 737, 747, 757, 767, 777 and A319/320. The 787 would be forthcoming to both. At that point, it might not make sense to introduce the A350 to the fleet, when a combination of 777/787 could do fine and not introduce an entire new type into the fleet. It's not hard to add it in, but why make things more complex than they need to be, when there are other options out there to fill those rolls? It'd likely not be the wisest investment of money out there - which would not sit well with Wall Street.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25563 posts, RR: 86
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 18174 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PM (Reply 15):
If the A350 does not perform then the options will certainly be in doubt whoever is running the airline.

And if it does perform? If it proves to be the best aircraft for the intended missions? What happens then?

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15812 posts, RR: 27
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 17861 times:

Quoting DeltAirlines (Reply 18):

I've heard that diminishing returns on standardization are around 30 frames, so 25 A350s isn't going to be a huge problem.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinerjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 16963 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 14):
Boeing won't be sitting around for too long letting Airbus eat Boeings' B77E lunch.

787-9 perhaps?


User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 16247 times:

Quoting craigpc01 (Thread starter):
What Comes Of UA's Airbus Fleet If Merged W/ CO?

Probably additional sales for the reengined, wingletted A321 versions Airbus is proposing UA.

How many Airbus vs Boeing NG aircraft are there in a combined fleet, from a standardisation standpoint?

If I remember well Delta deferred its 787 indefintely after they merged with Northwest.


User currently offlinedrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5201 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 16145 times:

My guess is that CO will fore go A321s for more of their existing 739ERs and cancel the A350 order for 787s and whatever Boeing has up its sleeve for the 777. The 319/320s would be retained. I'm sure we would see added capacity in CO markets that currently support 753s and 739s with the addition of domestic 777s and 767s.


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 15907 times:

I've a strong feeling that a hell of a lot of major airlines are going to end up with the A350 and the 787 in their fleets at some point anyway. Much like the A330 and 777 operate together in many fleets at the minute.

I suspect they will be somewhet harmonious and i don't see a reason why the A350 should be cancelled.


25 craigpc01 : Maybe, but I ask b/c CO is a Boeing only airline (on purpose) thus opening up the possibility for the A350 to be canceled. A CO merger is still in th
26 Jacobin777 : Well CO has already ordered the B789 and yes, the B789 will perform many of the B77E missions quite nicely. That being said, we'll have to wait to se
27 Cubsrule : But they are a Boeing only airline because at every point at which they placed a big order, Boeing had the best airplane. What happens when that's no
28 RJ111 : Well a few things about that. A) Wasn't that mainly Bethune's influence, now he's gone B) The merging will produce a new airline with new management
29 Tommy767 : The UA airbus aircraft would mix into the system very nicely, IMHO. A319/A320 would be great on some of the EWR routings: EWR-BOS/CLT/ATL/FLL/MIA. Won
30 ua76heavy : If CO becomes the successor of the merger (just as DL is in its merger with NW), most of UA's upper management will be bought-out and let go.
31 Post contains images EPA001 : Quite true, and I do not think that the management is married to Boeing because.... As several airlines have already done, quite a few more will go f
32 snn2003 : Anyone have an idea what would happen to Air Mike? I would hate to see them and GUM go away. SNN
33 BMI727 : But in order for CO to sign the agreement, Boeing had to offer highly favorable terms. What exactly those are has not been made public to my knowledg
34 Post contains links STT757 : It's pretty much expected and even desired by the investment community that CO acquire UA, meaning CO is in control. http://www.reuters.com/article/i
35 HNL-Jack : It's pretty much expected and even desired by the investment community that CO acquire UA, meaning CO is in control.[/quote] "Aquire" is likely the wr
36 Post contains images PM : Ay, there's the rub. It's because there are some who believe that their favorite airline (DL, CO...) flying Airbuses offendeth the natural order of t
37 OA412 : Indeed. Meanwhile, all reports indicate that DL is very happy with the A330. I see no reason why a potential merger between UA and CO would bring abo
38 RJ111 : Well the only new family they've bought since then was the 787 and that was quite an easy decision at the time pre A350XWB. Quite a bit will have cha
39 rheinwaldner : It will have to do anything with the merits of different aircrafts and nothing with the manufacturer. At least it should... Excluding Airbus products
40 BMI727 : But it hasn't. Boeing didn't put a gun to the airlines' heads when they made the deal. The airlines didn't do it just as a favor for Boeing, I can pr
41 rheinwaldner : It would now. It did not do harm then because at that time Boeing's strength was unparalleled. Today the basket of opportunities is double as big as
42 Post contains links BMI727 : The deal was made in the mid 1990s, when the offerings of the respective manufacturers were not a whole lot different. Since that time there has been
43 FriendlySkies : Seriously, this is getting old...perpetually failing? Please, show me where in UA's history they have had serious financial troubles and been on the
44 FWAERJ : Keep in mind that both have ordered the GEnx for their 787s. At the same time, CO's planes are mostly GE engines (with the exception of RB211-powered
45 RJ111 : I cannot see how doing that would be anything but extremely detrimental to CO/UA's future.
46 scorpy : Why would they go anywhere and why would any airline remove 150 perfectly good and modern aircraft to please a bunch of armchair enthusiasts? The BOD
47 Post contains links keesje : I think Airbus is preparing a A321 NG for US carrier incorporating new engines, winglets and maybe some additional mods. It offers the container/pall
48 United1 : Exactly why spend the money to replace current generation aircraft with current generation aircraft. None of the aircraft in UAs or COs fleets are in
49 scbriml : Indeed. Given the lack of choice on the A350, UA could easily select Rollers for their 787s.
50 NorthstarBoy : I can see the A319s staying around as they'd make good 735 replacements. As for the A320s, why not replace the older ones with 738s on a one for one b
51 BMI727 : First, announcements are different from actions and secondly, that has been the situation since the McDonnell Douglas merger. The "gentlemen's agreem
52 laca773 : Great, synopsis, Tommy! You pretty much hit it on the bullseye! Regards, LACA773
53 AADC10 : A merged CO/UA would do nothing with the A319/320s until they reach normal retirement age (around 25 years) or upon lease expiration. By the time the
54 Tommy767 : Thanks Laca773. I hope the goes down so we can see that kind of equipment variation!
55 NorthstarBoy : You could translate "all Boeing" as "All American." Rather than funnel the jobs and money to Europe, why not keep them here? I'd like to see US carri
56 Multimark : Yes, isn't it interesting posters assume the A350 will be the one that "doesn't perform", rather than the 787? AC has used ETOPS A319's on YYT-LHR. A
57 mariner : So you would be quite happy if all the European airlines dumped all their Boeing aircraft and switched to Airbus? mariner
58 PM : For the record, I should make it clear that I was responding to a poster who raised the possibility of the A350 underperforming. I am not among those
59 Post contains images BMI727 : That is quite possibly the single dumbest parameter to base fleet decisions on. An airline executive who makes a decision to buy an American airliner
60 vctony : I think DL has got to be a candidate for this aircraft.
61 sccutler : You're right. I was a drama queen on that post. I believe CO has, in recent times, been the significantly better-managed airline, but UAL today is no
62 laca773 : There's so much talk about the A350 series in this thread and how, when and where they will use it. The A350 is sitll years away. Have they even start
63 Post contains links and images PM : You are seriously suggesting that Airbus haven't yet decided how many wheels the plane will have? Seriously? http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...i
64 Post contains images astuteman : Would the 787 actually qualify in that case... ? It will fly in 2 1/2 years... Yes Worth getting up for, if only for the entertainment value. Rgds
65 laca773 : Yes SERIOUSLY, PM!! I did not know this and I apreciate you posting this information. Thanks, astuteman. It's nice to hear and learn more about the A
66 Post contains images PM : Think they can go ahead with the model now?
67 Post contains images keesje : United has a few Airbus aircraft inservice for some time. I think a rational approach like Delta / NWA take is most appreciated by the share holders.
68 Post contains images laca773 : Yes. I think they can now, but then again, that's gotten political too .
69 EPA001 : And that is the only decision criterium which should be applied here. There are no US airliners, and there are no European airliners. Both Airbus and
70 par13del : Explain why the A340-600 is still being sold and used by airlines when the 777 has proven to be more efficient a/c technically, or the 767 and the A3
71 nycplanebuff : As you say, old-fashioned and unrealistic. The major US car rental agencies no longer restrict their fleets to "American" brands, I have rented Toyot
72 Cubsrule : You've explained it adequately, I think. There's much more than simply performance numbers that goes in to selecting the best airplane, but that's wi
73 1337Delta764 : Absolutely NOT! Considering that DL pre-negotiated a payscale for the 739 and 739ER but not for the A321 when the NW merger was finalized, I don't th
74 RJ111 : The A320 certainly did exist and was in airline service. However just the A320 which is larger than the 737 Well they ordered the 764ER first which g
75 yellowtail : SOmebody earlier asked about Air MIke....I think if it is profitable, its stays....why give it up...no real overlap there. In all of this I wonder if
76 1337Delta764 : Of course there was also the 734 which was Boeing's direct competitor to the MD-80, however, it was immediately outclassed by the A320 due to the A32
77 Cubsrule : No - CO took its first 733 in July, 1985. The 320 first flew in February, 1987. Also incorrect. CO initially ordered 767s at the same time as their 7
78 RJ111 : Irrelevent. You can give me a list if you want but that does not prove that the 772ER was unquestionably superior to the A340 literally years before
79 Cubsrule : Are you suggesting that Boeing had no idea how the airplane would perform? Are you suggesting that airlines could not forecast how the airplane would
80 RJ111 : Of course they can be forecast but i doubt any unquestionable superiority was present at this stage. I mean if it were that obvious SQ for example wo
81 Cubsrule : But it's possible to imagine a situation where it is; while performance forecasts aren't perfect (and were less so in the 1990s), if Boeing had forec
82 Post contains links A342 : Yes, dozens of them. All twin-engine Airbus aircraft can be certified for ETOPS. With the exception of some early A300s, all are ETOPS-180 capable. T
83 BMI727 : I think that at least some CO Mike flights should stay with 737s because some of their destinations do not have the greatest facilities, so the lower
84 Cubsrule : I think it's related, actually. Had Airbus sold the 333 with the present-day MTOW and range then, they'd have undermined the 343 and the whole premis
85 BMI727 : They weren't the only ones either, but luckily they were able to rectify it.
86 A342 : And still, with maximum structural payload, an early A343 will fly some 1300nm farther than a present-day A333. Make that 2000nm for current A343s.
87 Post contains images Cubsrule : How many operators use that range, though?
88 RJ111 : The A330 was ETOPS friendly from the start - it had to be otherwise it'd barely have anywhere to fly. It was intended to be a viable Trans-Atlantic ai
89 Cubsrule : How do we explain the painfully slow sales start of the 330, then? The 777 also started with less range/MTOW but didn't start with such slow sales.
90 Post contains images astuteman : Don't forget that Airbus was very much in market penetration mode with the A330/A340. The big US airframers were very much the incumbents when the A3
91 A342 : I'd turn that question around: How many don't? I've been thinking about the networks of most A343 operators and haven't been able to come up with one
92 Cubsrule : The obvious large carrier is LH (though LH has at least one 333 route greater than 4000nm), and AF doesn't have many 343 routes over 4000nm. There ar
93 surfandsnow : If anything, UA's strong Pacific presence (in important Asian markets like Tokyo, Osaka, and Hong Kong, as well as Hawaii) would probably strengthen
94 A342 : Plenty of other large carriers flying the A343 on long routes, such as LA, EK, CI, SA, IB, MU, CA, SK, AY, TP...
95 Cubsrule : Certainly, but that wasn't your question... Keep in mind, too, that 3 airlines have more than 15 343s. 11 carriers or so have more than 15 77A/77Es.
96 1337Delta764 : I wonder how will the CO 764ER fleet would be affected in a merger with UA. UA plans on eliminating their 767 fleet and replacing it with the 787. Cou
97 drerx7 : The 764s won't be going anywhere for a while.
98 nws2002 : Why remove the 764? It is a relatively economical aircraft to operate, comfortable for passengers, and is a common type for the pilots with the 757s.
99 sancho99504 : Have fun buying that American built TV, cellphone, dvd player, pretty much any electronic device, clothes, etc.
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...
To The Naysayers Of UA's Fleet Age! posted Tue Dec 19 2000 19:09:28 by Imkeww
What Happened To The Captain Of UA 842? posted Sun Feb 21 2010 19:22:23 by OB1504
First Of Four Ex-ATA 753's Enters CO Fleet Monday posted Mon Dec 21 2009 16:37:51 by P0sitiveRate
Chicago Tribune's Photo Set Of UA Fleet posted Wed Oct 28 2009 17:58:40 by Yeogeo
CO-UA Merger--Fleet Outcome posted Thu Feb 7 2008 08:13:20 by CB777
What Changed Aer Lingus To An All Airbus Fleet? posted Sat Nov 26 2005 18:11:06 by Shamrock350
What Is The Status Of Canjet's New Fleet? posted Sun Dec 19 2004 07:42:54 by ViveLeYHZ
What Happened During UA's Summer Of 2000? posted Thu Jan 1 2004 09:01:48 by N670UW
UA B735 & A320 Audio, What Type Of Connection? posted Wed Jul 30 2003 13:31:12 by B764
What Type Of Plane Does UA Cargo Fly? posted Thu Aug 8 2002 04:15:54 by SJCguy