kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11956 posts, RR: 37 Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 22997 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.
WA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2043 posts, RR: 13 Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 22890 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.
ouboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4007 posts, RR: 23 Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 22748 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.
Any opinion/comment posted is that of my own and not that of Southwest Airlines Co.
LOWS From Austria, joined Oct 2011, 985 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 22678 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.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11712 posts, RR: 52 Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 22650 times:
I doubt US will order any B-767s, no matter the model. They have the A-330-300/-200
yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15990 posts, RR: 59 Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 22508 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.
usflyer msp From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1788 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 22503 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.
WA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2043 posts, RR: 13 Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 21880 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.
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.
NWAROOSTER From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 849 posts, RR: 3 Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 20972 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.
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?
capitalflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 256 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 20905 times:
Could they switch these orders into options for 789?
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7348 posts, RR: 7 Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 20733 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.
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.
boberito6589 From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 239 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 20733 times:
Quoting capitalflyer (Reply 15): Could they switch these orders into options for 789?
US does not have any aircraft on order with Boeing.
JHCRJ700 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 377 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 19754 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?
steeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 8815 posts, RR: 19 Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 19120 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.
YULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2109 posts, RR: 6 Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 18799 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?
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8590 posts, RR: 8 Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 17632 times:
Cargolex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1164 posts, RR: 9 Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 17222 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.
USPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3266 posts, RR: 8 Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 17178 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.
mpdpilot From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 935 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 17105 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.
FX1816 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1400 posts, RR: 5 Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 16513 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.
PITrules From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2691 posts, RR: 3 Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 15814 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."
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.
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, RR: 65 Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 15656 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 transaeroyyz: How ironic, and you call yourself US Airways, just kidding - maybe
27 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 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 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
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 101 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 11956 posts, 
From Austria, joined Oct 2011, 985 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 15990 posts, 
From Spain, joined Jun 2004, 11139 posts, 
From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, 
Five ordered in May of last year.
Printer friendly format 
