Alexinwa From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1158 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2150 times:
How old are these AC?? Will they replace them?? With what?? The 763?? This would only give UA about 25 more pax over the 762. The Current 762's do not have economy plus. AA would only gain about 25 pax as well with the 763 over the 762. Any 764's in UA's or AA's future for domestic 3 class use??
Ndebele From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 2903 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1986 times:
UA's oldest 762 was built in 1981, AA in 1984. Okay, it's getting time to think of a replacement. TWA (together with UA the launching customer) recently sold some of their 762s to Airborne Express for freighter conversation. Same might happen to AA's and UA's oldest 762s in the future.
But still I think that it will take ~5 years, because today it's more important to finally get rid of the 722s, which are much older. And keep in mind that AA's oldest MD-80 is older than it's oldest 762!
To summarize: Yes it's time to think of a replacement. But there are other aircraft in their fleets which should be replaced before.
I don't think we will see UA/AA 764s in the near future. Both AA and UA are happy with their 777s. I'd rather say they will buy more 763s.
CV640 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 952 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1927 times:
The 767-200s aren't that old. Most airlines keep their aircraft for as long as they can make money on them. The 767 is a twin engine, two man crew. Considering the DC-10s and L1011s finally left their fleets, I think you have a while to wait before you'll see a replacement anounced. At that time Iwould suspect it would be for 757s and 767-300s.
KonaB777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1892 times:
Yeah, the 767 is two-man two-engine, but if an airplane is getting old, regardless of how much a money maker it is, it should be replaced. What United should do is revamp the interiors to match the rest of the fleet.
ILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1870 times:
United has 20 767-222s in their fleet. The first one that was delivered N606UA was the first 767 that carried passengers. Right now, in terms of age on the plane, they are still young, well, not young, but middle aged. The average life span of a comercial plane like the 767 is about 25 to 30 years. These planes are 18 years old.
If United were to consider replacing the 762, it would be not because age of the plane, but that the engine types of the 762 are JT9Ds while the engines on their other wide bodies are PW4000s. But then again, you could just re-engine them.
In terms of the aircrafts ability, look at the 727. Just this year the last 75 of them are being retired. The 762 is a perfictly able plane. Long term, I do not see it in United's fleet. I see more 763s. I'd actually like to see the 764, but then again, thats me dreaming.
SJC>SFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1831 times:
I don't really think that a replacement for these planes will come very soon. Most of AA and UAs 767s fly transcons which means they are flying something like 2 cycles per day. This doesn't accumulate nearly as quickly as most other aircraft. These planes also go across the pond, and have the perfect capacity for both airlines. Both airlines are also in the process of placing EP, MRTC, and improved premium cabins in to these aircraft (well maybe not all of them). But they are still in relatively good condition, and have good reliability. I've never been on a 767 delayed for technical problems.
L.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1825 times:
I dont know but I hope they do. I once flew a DL 763 BOS-ATL-TPA and was VERY disappointed. We were 4 hours delayed and experinced severe turbulence throughout the flight. Also, the airplane sounded like it was falling apart. Six Months later I flew the same route on an L10. It was the best flight of my life. And no I havent flown on a 747.
767-322ETOPS From United States of America, joined May 2001, 324 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1762 times:
Not that this would affect UA's decision to replaces the 762s, but a lot of passengers can't stand them because the interiors are getting old and shabby and would prefer to fly a 763 or even a 757. Personally, I think they're great and enjoy flying them JFK-LAX/SFO.
I have 2 questions for the UA experts on the 762s:
1) The timetables used to say that the 762s were due for amenity upgrades in 2001. In fact no upgrades have occured, and the timetables don't say this anymore. Is this a signal on UA's commitment to the 762, or just a cash saver?
2) On Planebusiness.com there has been mention that 3 class 772s will be introduced to the premium transcon runs this fall. Is this true?
SFOintern From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 770 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1747 times:
1) Both. Because of budget cuts, UA decided it has less of a commitment to its 762 interiors than before. Hence the scrapping of the 744 Y Class PTV upgrades as well.
2) 3 Class 777s have been spotted on JFK before. Unfortunately, there won't be any this fall. From SFO-JFK, there will be 9 daily flights. From LAX-JFK there will be 8 dailies. Out of those, you need to remember UA844 SFO-JFK and UA7 JFK-SFO... Those are the only 767-300 out of the 762 bunch. Sad, but true.
There has been talk of the 762s getting replaced by 757s on this route. Personally, I think this would be dumb, as this route *requires* three-class premium service. However, as you pointed out by your preference of "even" a 757 over the 762, there comes a point when the old bird's shabby interior condition is a worse option than a two class narrowbody. That point has been reached.
I would like to see triple's going transcon, but it looks like the only ones doing that are going from SFO/LAX-IAD and from SFO-MIA.
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 12, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1718 times:
The 762s in service with UA, DL and AA, which are all about 20 years old, will be around for a while: these are good effecient aircraft and, as far as UA is concerned, serve the transcon markets well. They can accomodate 3 classes of pax, are the right size, and pax seem happy with them. The 762 interior upgrade that UA was talking about has been delayed, maybe next year. DL's 762's do look a bit sad inside, while, in my experience, AA's look very nice and fresh. All could benefit from the newlook interior that CO has on its new 762's - I think it looks great!
I do not think UA or AA will directly replace the 762, eventually, the 762s will be replaced by 763s as the subject airlines take more 777s and schedules and allocations are shuffled. The narrowbody 752 or 753 is not a great alternative since it would be difficult to offer 3 classes of service on a narrow body, and pax seem to prefer widebody aircraft on the 5 to 6 hour segments that the 767 often flies. (Widebody comfort - whatever that means) Also, remember that UA and AA makes much money from its premium class transcon pax and does not want to upset them.
When AA thinks about replacing its 762s, it will probably be in conjunction with an A300 replacement aircraft. Maybe a large order by AA for the 764 or shorter-range version of the 777 will come?
Purdue Arrow From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1574 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1679 times:
I had 2 flights on AA 767-200s yesterday, and the airplane, from a passenger point of view, does not need to be replaced. The first flight, JFK-SJC, I was in Business Class. While the aircraft did not have MRTB, it did have the new business class seats, which are very comfortable. The second flight, SFO-BOS, I was in coach, and again the aircraft had the new Business and Coach seats. The planes also had the new carpets, bulkheads, etc. The only product improvement AA has implemented in the 763 that was not on these planes was the new First Class... As the 762s don't fly many international routes, they will retain the leather and sheepskin seats in First, rather than getting the Full-flat seat that is going tinto the 763. In the end, the average passenger would have no idea that this airplane was 15+ years old - the interiors are as fresh as those on any other AA plane (excepting the F100, 727, M11 and 757, which have the older interiors).
DIA From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 3273 posts, RR: 26
Reply 16, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1665 times:
Speaking for UA:
The 767-300 is a good candidate. The 777 is just unnecessary, being much, much larger. The 757-300 could be an alternative if UA chooses to order them. The 757-200 is also another good candidate. It is unlikely UA will order brand new 767-200s like Continental did.
A mix of coast to coast 767-300s and 757-200s is likely.
Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
Blink182 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 5492 posts, RR: 15
Reply 17, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1655 times:
I flew 2 763s on AA transatlantic lately(just got back from my final leg yesterday). If AA's 762's interiors look anything like their 763s do, they must look pretty damn nice on the interior. For some reason, both of my flights had the old arm rests and wall paneling. One had the old tray tables also, but the both had MRTC and the new seats though. All in all, I think it will be awhile before you see the 762s taken out of service. AA and UA still have 727s to retire. With AA, I think you will see the oldest MD-80s retired before any 762s are retired. With UA, I think it will be the oldest 733's(depending how old they are). In my opiniun, I think 15 years old for an aircraft really isn't that old.
ps- pardon for the misspelling as I still have some jetlag.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
Tan flyr From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1930 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1633 times:
Blink..Your pardoned..Welcome Home...
Just to add my 2 cents...these are generally low cycle machines...good for many years yet. Bet that AA will have them on trans-cons 5 yrs or more from now as they allow frequency, which is what high end business travel wants on trans cons. Remember the first 8 at AA are not ER's and will be in the domestic system. These birds make money for AA & UA..bet on it!
Eventually...I also would expect an order for 764's from both AA & UA..more of a true DC-10 replacement.
ContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1624 times:
I have flown the AA 767-200 and -200ER on both transcon and international service (to/from Europe)
and have to say these are nice planes. American
does a decent job of keeping them looking fresh
and up to date. I am not a big fan of the 762 at all
and much prefer the 767-300 and the -400 even
more, but AA's are nice enough and I believe that
these birds will be in the UA/AA/DL fleets for some
time to come.
As for United, I think they are making a big mistake
by not upgrading their 762's used on flights to/from
LAX and SFO (from JFK). The seats are all old and
while the planes are clean inside, the look is
decidedly dated and frankly, Delta is knocking them
to the punch with their BizElite configured 763's
although DL does not have the frequencies that UA
does on this very travelled route. UA probably will
keep the 762's for some time. They have low cycles
and the 772 is just too big a plane to fly on what
amounts to 8 daily nonstops in this market. Perhaps
you might see one or two 772's during heavy flight
times and if UA needs to shuffle 777's between its
LAX/SFO hubs and JFK for European or Latin America
service, but for the most part, the 762's are here
to stay. UA should upgrade the seats and cabin
amenities, and tout what is the only other higher
frequency three class service from New York to
the West Coast. Delta has too few flights to call
it high frequency. TWA will soon be AA and flies
mostly 757's now on these routes, and Continental
uses a lot of 737's (800's and NG's) with the odd
767 and 757 to LAX and SFO, so no three class
Hugo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1599 times:
How much will it cost to install totally new interiors on a 762 anyway? If the planes are mechanically sound, I think it would make good sense to refurbish them with new bins, sidewalls, seats, carpeting, bulkheads and bins. Do the CO 762 have the new 777-style interiors? Perhaps Boeing or an outfit like Heath-Tecna can provide retrofit kits for 767's. Those squarish bins should be replaced with ones that can take more capacity.
Hugo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1596 times:
How much will it cost to install totally new interiors on a 762 anyway? If the planes are mechanically sound, I think it would make good sense to refurbish them with new sidewalls, seats, carpeting, bulkheads and bins. Do the CO 762 have the new 777-style interiors? Perhaps Boeing or an outfit like Heath-Tecna can provide retrofit kits for 767's. Those squarish bins should be replaced with ones that can take more capacity.
SJC>SFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (13 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1587 times:
To you Purdue, or whoever may know, I am surprised to see the (once weekly i think) 762 on the SJC-JFK route. I was on a 738 a couple months back and first class was very full, but coach was only 65-75% full.... what were the loads looking like on the 762, and why is it there?