Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Airways 767 Order, Why Didn't They Order 300s  
User currently offlinedelawareusa From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 107 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 25707 times:

US air got 6 767-200s from their acquisition of Piedmont. Then they ordered 6 more -200s why didn't they order 767-300s?

36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12593 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 25192 times:

Don't forget also that this was US's first dip into the long haul market, so from that perspective, a 762 made more sense - and less risk, than the 763. Commonality with the (then) existing ex-PI 762 fleet must have been a factor as well.

User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2264 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 25084 times:

Piedmont's original 6 aircraft order was placed before the 767-300ER was launched.

I would not be surprised if US chose to order more -200ERs for commonality with their existing fleet, rather than have two small fleets of 200ERs and 300ERs.



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlineouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4615 posts, RR: 23
Reply 3, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 24942 times:

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 5):

Piedmont's original 6 aircraft order was placed before the 767-300ER was launched.

I would not be surprised if US chose to order more -200ERs for commonality with their existing fleet, rather than have two small fleets of 200ERs and 300ERs.

I would be surprised if they did. The days are numbered on the 767 in the US fleet.


User currently offlineLOWS From Austria, joined Oct 2011, 1191 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 24872 times:

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 5):
I would not be surprised if US chose to order more -200ERs for commonality with their existing fleet, rather than have two small fleets of 200ERs and 300ERs.

Why? They've got A330s and A350s on order. If I'm not mistaken, their switching to an all Airbus fleet.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12179 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 24844 times:

I doubt US will order any B-767s, no matter the model. They have the A-330-300/-200

User currently offlineeicvd From Ireland, joined Mar 2008, 2188 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 24763 times:

Nobody is talking about a recent or future order by US for 767's, their talking about the past order by US!

User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16365 posts, RR: 56
Reply 7, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 24702 times:

Quoting kaitak (Reply 4):
Don't forget also that this was US's first dip into the long haul market, so from that perspective, a 762 made more sense - and less risk, than the 763. Commonality with the (then) existing ex-PI 762 fleet must have been a factor as well.

Well said. This likely sums it up. US only operated 12 762's at its peak -- a rather small fleet. To add the 763 would have exasperated the motley collection of subtypes in a then very motley fleet.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlineusflyer msp From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 24696 times:

US had much more modest TATL aspirations back then and 763 probably would have been too much plane for them. It wasn't until the name change in 1997 that US really became focused on building a strong TATL network.

User currently offlinePlymSpotter From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11701 posts, RR: 60
Reply 9, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 24073 times:

Quoting LOWS (Reply 7):
Why? They've got A330s and A350s on order. If I'm not mistaken, their switching to an all Airbus fleet.

The poster is talking in the past tense.


Dan  



...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2264 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 24073 times:

Quoting ouboy79 (Reply 6):
Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 5):

Piedmont's original 6 aircraft order was placed before the 767-300ER was launched.

I would not be surprised if US chose to order more -200ERs for commonality with their existing fleet, rather than have two small fleets of 200ERs and 300ERs.

I would be surprised if they did. The days are numbered on the 767 in the US fleet.
Quoting LOWS (Reply 7):
Why? They've got A330s and A350s on order. If I'm not mistaken, their switching to an all Airbus fleet.

I was referring to US' previous orders for the 767. The original poster asked why US did not choose the -300ER. I tried to state that the -300ER was not available when PI placed their original order, and, when US ordered additional 767s in the late 1980s, after the -300ER was available, they probably chose to buy more -200ERs for fleet commonality, instead of having a mixed fleet of -200ERs and -300ERs.

I agree with everyone else - a US order for more 767s now would be about as likely as a Cape Air order for 777s.



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently onlineNWAROOSTER From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1150 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 23165 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LOWS (Reply 7):
Why? They've got A330s and A350s on order. If I'm not mistaken, their switching to an all Airbus fleet.

Not to deviate too much of the original subject. Why are the US Airways A330-300s Pratt & Whiney powered and their A330-200s Rolls Royce Trent powered? I cannot quite understand the economics for using two different engine manufactures for the same basic type of aircraft. You cannot swap engines between the two models and you must stock two different engines types rather than one.
Anyone know a good reason for this?   



Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
User currently offlinecapitalflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 347 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 23098 times:

Could they switch these orders into options for 789?

User currently onlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8496 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 22926 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 14):
Not to deviate too much of the original subject. Why are the US Airways A330-300s Pratt & Whiney powered and their A330-200s Rolls Royce Trent powered? I cannot quite understand the economics for using two different engine manufactures for the same basic type of aircraft. You cannot swap engines between the two models and you must stock two different engines types rather than one.

The A333 was ordered about 10 years before the A332 so they are really two different planes. The A333 is for east coast to Europe and nothing more. The A332 allows US to fly to Israel, fly from Phoenix to Europe should it want to, and Asia.

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 13):
I was referring to US' previous orders for the 767. The original poster asked why US did not choose the -300ER. I tried to state that the -300ER was not available when PI placed their original order, and, when US ordered additional 767s in the late 1980s, after the -300ER was available, they probably chose to buy more -200ERs for fleet commonality, instead of having a mixed fleet of -200ERs and -300ERs.

USair only had Business Class and Coach so they have a high passenger count for the 767-200ER, a 763ER might have been too many seats probably over 250.


User currently offlineboberito6589 From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 22926 times:

Quoting capitalflyer (Reply 15):
Could they switch these orders into options for 789?

US does not have any aircraft on order with Boeing.


User currently offlineJHCRJ700 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 21947 times:

Quoting eicvd (Reply 9):
Nobody is talking about a recent or future order by US for 767's, their talking about the past order by US!

haha McFly hello anybody home?

An above poster stated that US is keeping their 762's until 2017? Is that true? What about Continental's 762's and Americans?



RUSH
User currently offlinesteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9268 posts, RR: 21
Reply 16, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks ago) and read 21313 times:

I thought US was trying to secure 767s to fly PIT-NRT, which I believe is some 6000 miles or so. They were unable to acquire the necessary aircraft tho, and therefore stopped pursuing that route. This was back in the early to mid '90s by the way. The poster who told me this didn't indicate if the planes were 763s or 762s with the appropriate engines. I believe some of the 762s had range capabilities of 6600 miles. Of course, PI didn't have those...

You know, given the time frame I was given here, I think they were going after the 762s with the extended range. Someone in this thread said the 763 wasn't launched until later in the decade...



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2185 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 20992 times:

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 14):
Why are the US Airways A330-300s Pratt & Whiney powered and their A330-200s Rolls Royce Trent powered? I

Very few, if any, of the recent A330s worldwide have been delivered with P&W engines. While I am not sure why, it probably has to do with the major advances that have been made on the A330 since the early days, and that at one point P&W stopped keeping up with upgrades for their engines, making them obsolete compared to the GE and Rolls engines. LX has PW powered A332 and opted for RR on their 333s, similar situation to US. Although there, the A333s were purchased to replace the A332s, and LH already operated RR-powered A333s. Keep in mind that PW has pretty much left the big commercial jet engine market, offers nothing for the 787, and so far their only modern project is the Engine Alliance venture with GE for the A380.

Quoting capitalflyer (Reply 15):
Could they switch these orders into options for 789?

That sure has turned into a funny thread.



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineDeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9700 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 19825 times:

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 20):

I would guess it is because the T700 and GE CF6 have high thrust variants vs the PW4000 for the A330.

I do believe KE ordered 332s not to long ago and went with PW. Could be wrong though.



yep.
User currently offlineCargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 19415 times:

Quoting JHCRJ700 (Reply 18):
What about Continental's 762's and Americans?

AA's newest 762 is from 1988, and I wouldn't expect such an old fleet to remain active for much longer.

The CO/UA 762ER's are quite a bit newer than any of the 762s at US/AA, all being delivered in 2000/2001. But even then I think (but cannot confirm) they're being phased out of the fleet. The oldest two of CO's late-model 762ER's are now serving with Omni Air International - they were sold off last summer - leaving a small sub-fleet of only eight aircraft.


User currently offlineUSPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3295 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 19371 times:

Quoting steeler83 (Reply 19):
I thought US was trying to secure 767s to fly PIT-NRT, which I believe is some 6000 miles or so. They were unable to acquire the necessary aircraft tho, and therefore stopped pursuing that route. This was back in the early to mid '90s by the way. The poster who told me this didn't indicate if the planes were 763s or 762s with the appropriate engines. I believe some of the 762s had range capabilities of 6600 miles. Of course, PI didn't have those...

IIRC, US was trying to get 767-300s, but couldn't secure a delivery slot. This was around 1991-92, when Sony had that plant in Westmoreland County.



It's a Great Day for Hockey!
User currently offlinempdpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1005 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 19298 times:

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 14):
Not to deviate too much of the original subject. Why are the US Airways A330-300s Pratt & Whiney powered and their A330-200s Rolls Royce Trent powered? I cannot quite understand the economics for using two different engine manufactures for the same basic type of aircraft. You cannot swap engines between the two models and you must stock two different engines types rather than one.
Anyone know a good reason for this?   

My limited understanding is that US Airways ordered the A330-300 prior to the merger and was PW similar to the CFM A320 series. When they merged with America West, America West was a RR shop and that is why the later delivered A321 and new ordered A330-200 we ordered with RR. Now I have always heard that the RR was a better performer but I don't have any hard evidence for that.

I do think a lot of what decides engine choice after performance is maintenance preference/cost. Already have a lot of RR engines it will be easier and cheaper to add another RR as opposed to adding a GE



One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
User currently offlineFX1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 18706 times:

Quoting mpdpilot (Reply 24):
My limited understanding is that US Airways ordered the A330-300 prior to the merger and was PW similar to the CFM A320 series. When they merged with America West, America West was a RR shop and that is why the later delivered A321 and new ordered A330-200 we ordered with RR. Now I have always heard that the RR was a better performer but I don't have any hard evidence for that.

Ummm, those engines that AWE had on their A320's and A319's and now have on the new A321's are not RR but the IAE V2500.

Quoting mpdpilot (Reply 24):
I do think a lot of what decides engine choice after performance is maintenance preference/cost. Already have a lot of RR engines it will be easier and cheaper to add another RR as opposed to adding a GE

Only the 757 fleet is RR powered and that was common between both US and AWE before the merger.

FX1816


User currently offlinePITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3254 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 18007 times:

My understanding is that Piedmont ordered six 762s, plus six options. USAir inherited the options for the 200s, which they subsequently exercised.

"Piedmont Airlines Thursday received its first Boeing 767-200 jet, which it plans to use on flights between Charlotte and London starting next month. The Winston-Salem-based airline has five more similar jets on order from Seattle-based Boeing Co. and has options on six more."

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/...ort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM

Quoting steeler83 (Reply 19):
I thought US was trying to secure 767s to fly PIT-NRT, which I believe is some 6000 miles or so. They were unable to acquire the necessary aircraft tho, and therefore stopped pursuing that route.
Quoting USPIT10L (Reply 23):
IIRC, US was trying to get 767-300s, but couldn't secure a delivery slot. This was around 1991-92, when Sony had that plant in Westmoreland County.

NRT slots were much more difficult to obtain than 767 slots at the time, as it was a single runway airport and still dominant in Asia.

I often wondered how much influence that Sony plant had on PIT-Japan passenger demand, and Volkswagen before it to Germany. Obviously not enough to make a difference (ironically PIT gained its FRA flight after VW pulled out). But whenever the topic of LH's CLT-MUC comes up the first thing mentioned is the BMW plant in Spartanburg, SC.



FLYi
User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6999 posts, RR: 63
Reply 24, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 17849 times:

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 14):
Not to deviate too much of the original subject. Why are the US Airways A330-300s Pratt & Whiney powered and their A330-200s Rolls Royce Trent powered?

I understand that PW made certain promises regarding the PW4000s on US A330s that they failed to keep. US was not happy. Remember, too, that they had another dozen or so PW-powered A330s on order when they ordered the RR-powered planes. They pushed the PW planes far into the future and then cancelled them.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 20):
Very few, if any, of the recent A330s worldwide have been delivered with P&W engines.

I'm going to have to correct you on that one. Two A330s with PW have already been delivered this year (both to Malaysia Airlines). Last year 19 A330s were delivered with PW and that was up from 14 in 2010.

Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 21):
I do believe KE ordered 332s not to long ago and went with PW.

   Five ordered in May of last year.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 20):
P&W stopped keeping up with upgrades for their engines, making them obsolete compared to the GE and Rolls engines.

Far from it. PW continue to improve the PW4000.

Quoting YULWinterSkies (Reply 20):
Keep in mind that PW has pretty much left the big commercial jet engine market

Not quite. Just last month two 767s with PW were delivered and the 767 tanker will keep the PW4000 in production for a long time.


25 jfk777 : The SWISS A333's were ordered by a different management then the A332 they inherited when LH merged with LX. P & W still has some customers like
26 Post contains images transaeroyyz : How ironic, and you call yourself US Airways, just kidding - maybe
27 Post contains images PM : Orders are rather thin on the ground, though. Just the 5 for Korean last year. In 2010 they 'kept' Malaysian with valuable orders for 19. They also p
28 einsteinboricua : I don't see any harm in that. Just like Aeroflot calls itself Aeroflot Russian (International?) Airlines. Only recently has Aeroflot been adding Russ
29 jfk777 : GE is not pushing the CF6-80 series any more they are pushing the GE90 on the 777-300ER and the Gen X for the 787.
30 Molykote : This: The PW4168 is a great engine. It's just too bad that Pratt backed away from the higher thurst variants promised early on.
31 USPIT10L : IINM, Bayer has more influence on PIT-Germany traffic than any other company in Pittsburgh. LGWPIT and CDGPIT never had any real corporate contracts
32 Polot : As the 763 is built on the same line as the 762, I don't understand how they could have had difficulty getting new build 763s but not 762s.[Edited 20
33 Viscount724 : LX didn't inherit any A332s from LH and they didn't merge with LH. They are separate companies and LX has it's own management team. LX is a wholly-ow
34 Post contains links PITrules : That MAN application was actually from PIT, and you are correct it was included in the timetable. http://www.departedflights.com/US030191.html Other
35 USPIT10L : Interesting. Never knew US applied for FCO and MXP from PIT. I knew about PHLMXP and the still-served PHLFCO. US didn't get the original application
36 Post contains images PM : I'm not quite sure what point you're making here. Surely they could "push" all three. Indeed, why wouldn't they? Anyway, "pushing" or not, they are s
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 To Order 733/734 Replacement posted Mon Feb 5 2007 19:19:26 by Jimyvr
US Airways To Order EMB posted Thu Mar 27 2003 14:33:37 by Flying-Tiger
Questions About US Airways 767 Flights. posted Mon Feb 20 2012 13:23:15 by Zhamnov
US Airways 767 ATC Channel? posted Tue Mar 9 2010 19:45:35 by TheGMan
US Airways 767-200 Routes posted Fri Jan 29 2010 14:33:39 by FlightLover
US Airlines To SNN - Why If They Don't Have To? posted Thu Jan 21 2010 08:23:38 by Mozart
US Airways 767 In MIA posted Sun May 27 2007 18:20:48 by UtilianPilot07
US Airways 767-200ER At CUN... posted Thu Jul 27 2006 06:50:26 by Thering
US Airways 767 Cabin posted Tue Mar 7 2006 07:04:42 by Waleckdaddy
1st US Airways 767 In New Livery Is Painted! posted Fri Nov 11 2005 23:54:45 by Jmc1975