Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA/US Merger Impact: Fleet  
User currently offlineModerators From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 505 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 31286 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Dear All,

in order to consolidate the AA/US merger threads (and after input from users, which we highly appreciate) the moderators decided to start separate threads each discussing one aspect of the AA/US merger and its impact to both the industry and the two airlines involved.

Please continue discussing this hot news in their individual official threads:

AA/US Merger Impact: Fleet (THIS THREAD ONLY)
AA/US Merger Impact: Hubs
AA/US Merger Impact: Employees
AA/US Merger Impact: HQ
AA/US Merger Impact: Livery
AA/US Merger Impact: Unions
AA/US Merger Impact: Routes
AA/US Merger Impact: Inflight Service

Enjoy & have a nice weekend!

The Airliners.net Moderator crew


Please use moderators@airliners.net to contact us.
124 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1834 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 31082 times:

In my opinion, the biggest impact on the merged fleet would be retirement of US oldest airframes, as well as the cancellation of their A350XWB order.

Now that AA's 787 order is firmed up, it would make no sense whatsoever to hold onto these airplanes.



All Hail Mighty Triple Seven, The MURDERER of the so-called "Queen"!!!!
User currently offlineCXfirst From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 2929 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 30989 times:

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 1):

In my opinion, the biggest impact on the merged fleet would be retirement of US oldest airframes, as well as the cancellation of their A350XWB order.

Now that AA's 787 order is firmed up, it would make no sense whatsoever to hold onto these airplanes.

Many airlines are ordering the 788 as well as A359/A3510, as there is some size difference. I could see some of US order being converted to more A359's, and I'd think that would work well for AA/US.

The thing that I could see stop that are the 77W's. Perhaps, AA/US will feel the A359 would be coming to soon due to the new 777's in the fleet.

-CXfirst



From Norway, live in Australia
User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10365 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 30912 times:

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 1):
Now that AA's 787 order is firmed up, it would make no sense whatsoever to hold onto these airplanes.

The A350 is as much a 777 competitor as it is to the 787. Maybe they defer the order, but A350s would make good 772 replacements by the end of the decade.

What I hope for is that a merger might raise the small chance of a future VLA order, not knowing too much of the route structure, on long trunk routes that could make sense.


User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 608 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 30881 times:

US is not in bankruptcy - so A350 cancellation would be expensive.

User currently offlinescouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3364 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 30743 times:

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 4):
US is not in bankruptcy - so A350 cancellation would be expensive.

Yes it is strange that AA is to the partner that's gone bust but they seem to be making the dramatic announcements fleet, new livery etc.

As for the A350 order in particular - the firming of the 737 and A320neo orders yesterday says to me that they won't have an issue with split fleet in the future but I wonder if they will be swapped to the A350-1000 to spread the capacity upwards from the 788.

A VLA could be brilliant - just like the thought of an A380 in the new AA colours 


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16694 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 30580 times:

US A330s to JFK and MIA, AA 763s to PHL.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12041 posts, RR: 47
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 30308 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 1):
it would make no sense whatsoever to hold onto these airplanes

Tell that to the ever increasing number of airlines that have purchased 787s and A350s.



Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11129 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 30199 times:

Since we're treating this as if it's already happened, my predictions on the fleet...

777: AA 772s reconfigured in previously-announced higher-density J/MCE/Y layout and find their way onto legacy-US routes such as PHL/CLT-LHR and legacy-AA routes like JFK/DFW-CDG, DFW/MIA-MAD, MIA-GIG/SCL, etc.

A330: US A330s reconfigured with MCE and deployed on legacy-AA routes such as JFK-FCO, JFK-BCN, MIA-BCN, MIA-CNF, etc.

787/A350: 787s introduced per recent AA-Boeing agreement, A350 order possibly cancelled in favor of additional A320 family jets to more rapidly replace US 737s and 757s, and AA MD80s

767: US 762 fleet parked near-immediately, and replaced with AA 763s or 757s; AA 763 retirement timeline accelerates

757: US 757 fleet parked near-immediately, and replaced by AA 757s (either domestic or international configuration, as applicable) or new narrowbody jets being delivered

A321: AA/US comingled fleets used throughout network, including increasingly to replace 757s in Hawaii and Latin America markets, and on transcons; separate AA premium JFK-LAX/SFO A321 plans continue

737/A320: US 737s parked near-immediately, and AA handles 737/A320 mix much like Delta, with 737 being configured with a larger premium cabin for use in premium domestic markets and transcons, while A320 configured with a smaller premium cabin and used for lower-yielding markets (e.g., non-MIA Florida, leisure Caribbean and Mexico, PHX/LAS/RNO, etc.)

A319: AA/US comingled fleets used throughout domestic/North America network

MD80: fleet retirement continues and accelerates

EJet/CR7: EJets will be prioritized first and foremost to more competitive markets where a better product is required (e.g., ORD and NYC, then WAS and PHL) while CR7s will be flowed into other hubs where AA is more dominant (DFW, MIA, CLT, LAX)

Dash 8: The US Express fleet of Dash 8s are quite old, and will need replacement at some point, and many of Eagle’s shorter routes out of multiple hubs (including DFW, ORD and MIA) would also be a good fit for a prop; I could see AMR/regionals placing a substantial order for Q400s or ATR72s to fill this role


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8092 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 30068 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
777: AA 772s reconfigured in previously-announced higher-density J/MCE/Y layout and find their way onto legacy-US routes such as PHL/CLT-LHR and legacy-AA routes like JFK/DFW-CDG, DFW/MIA-MAD, MIA-GIG/SCL, etc.

A330: US A330s reconfigured with MCE and deployed on legacy-AA routes such as JFK-FCO, JFK-BCN, MIA-BCN, MIA-CNF, etc.

787/A350: 787s introduced per recent AA-Boeing agreement, A350 order possibly cancelled in favor of additional A320 family jets to more rapidly replace US 737s and 757s, and AA MD80s

Lets not look down on the A350, it is a good airplane and many airlines will operate A350 with 777 and 787's. Since USairways management is running the new AA I doubt they will cancel their own A350 order. Some AA 777 will go to Charlotte and PHL as will some A330 go to Miami and JFK. Routes that AA has need more then 767 capacity but not quite 777 capacity. With this merger Phoenix should get some long haul international flying, can Tokyo or LHR be far away ? PHX to Sydney would be awesome, its closer then DFW and allows for connections from many cities.


User currently offlineseatback From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 739 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 29838 times:

Quoting scouseflyer (Reply 5):
Yes it is strange that AA is to the partner that's gone bust but they seem to be making the dramatic announcements fleet, new livery etc.

Yes, but my understanding is that this is a MERGER vs. a buyout/takeover. AA shareholders will get around 70% of shares in the new airline with US shareholders at around 30%.

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
787s introduced per recent AA-Boeing agreement, A350 order possibly cancelled in favor of additional A320 family jets to more rapidly replace US 737s and 757s, and AA MD80s

I completely agree that the A350 orders will be cancelled in favor of more A319/21's. Although Airbus could use the heft of an AA order for the A350 program, at the end of the day they'll be ok with an order for more A319/21's.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 8773 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 29795 times:

Money has already been spent on the A350 order, I don't believe they will cancel it. However, I can see the A358 being upgraded to the A359.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 9):
Lets not look down on the A350, it is a good airplane and many airlines will operate A350 with 777 and 787's.

   Just like AF with so many 777's in the fleet and another 25 787 + 25 A350 aircraft on order.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1446 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 29680 times:

A330s would be good in MIA with their good cargo capacity. I'd like to see A319s and E90s based in ORD to fill the gap there.

User currently offlineunityofsaints From Ireland, joined Nov 2011, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 29586 times:

Will this be the first "pro-Airbus" megacarrier in The States? United has Boeing fans in management now. Delta has exclusively bought Boeing since the merger. Ex-USAir management, however, likes Airbus.

Personally I think it will be cool if it works out like this. Variety is the spice of life!

[Edited 2013-02-08 05:57:54]

User currently offlineCoronado From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1127 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 29476 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seatback (Reply 10):

AA creditors get 70%. These are not willing shareholders Since AA is unable to pay these creditors back in full these creditors are using the b/k laws to at least get some recovery on their debts in this case percentage ownership which might eventually be worth something if they can sell their stock. Current AA shareholders get zip.



The Original Coronado: First CV jet flights RG CV 990 July 1965; DL CV 880 July 1965; Spantax CV990 Feb 1973
User currently offlineAVLAirlineFreq From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 971 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 29125 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):

EJet/CR7: EJets will be prioritized first and foremost to more competitive markets where a better product is required (e.g., ORD and NYC, then WAS and PHL) while CR7s will be flowed into other hubs where AA is more dominant (DFW, MIA, CLT, LAX)

Dash 8: The US Express fleet of Dash 8s are quite old, and will need replacement at some point, and many of Eagle’s shorter routes out of multiple hubs (including DFW, ORD and MIA) would also be a good fit for a prop; I could see AMR/regionals placing a substantial order for Q400s or ATR72s to fill this role

The question of what happens with the Express/Eagle fleet is a really interesting one. The Dash 8 fleet, in particular, serves a very specific role for US, and I'm really curious to see what the future is for the regionals in this merger.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 28973 times:

The A350 will be a part of the new AA fleet. The retirement of all the 762's will be the first type to be removed and then the 763's will be replaced by the arrival of the 787's for the long haul fleet. I can see their always being a mix of A and B for their transcontinental and short haul flying.


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineRyefly From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1391 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 28873 times:

Perhaps change the A350 orders for some A380's.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29690 posts, RR: 84
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 28831 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't see the merged entity needing to cancel the A350 order, but if they do, I would expect all of the A350-800s to be changed to A350-900s and combined with the 787-9s to become A330-300 and 777-200ER replacements.

User currently offlinepiedmont727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 28804 times:

i think there will be a good boeing and airbus mix , im personally hopeing that they become mostlly boeing buyers like delta but wethier airbus or boeing becomes the one they buy more i think it depends on managment if its manelly us i think it will go to a airbus fleet and if american i think a more boeing but still airbus fleet either way with the merger there will be one hell of a mix

User currently offlinedallasnewark From Estonia, joined Nov 2005, 494 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 28225 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 9):
Lets not look down on the A350, it is a good airplane and many airlines will operate A350 with 777 and 787's. Since USairways management is running the new AA I doubt they will cancel their own A350 order. Some AA 777 will go to Charlotte and PHL as will some A330 go to Miami and JFK. Routes that AA has need more then 767 capacity but not quite 777 capacity. With this merger Phoenix should get some long haul international flying, can Tokyo or LHR be far away ? PHX to Sydney would be awesome, its closer then DFW and allows for connections from many cities.

The chance of PHX getting a SYD flight are remotely low. Phoenix does not offer the same number of connections DFW can, so what would be the point of flying into PHX if they have multiple flights to LAX. Why does anyone think that Phoenix and Charlotte would get more international service after the merger, the opposite will be true. Mergers cut flights and streamline operations, it is not the other way around



B732/3/4/5/6/7/8/9, B742/4, B752/3,B762/3/4, B772/3, A306, A318/9/20/21, A332/3, A343/6, MD80/83/88, L1011, TU104/134, F
User currently offlineCalebWilliams From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 274 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 28108 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
EJet/CR7: EJets will be prioritized first and foremost to more competitive markets where a better product is required (e.g., ORD and NYC, then WAS and PHL) while CR7s will be flowed into other hubs where AA is more dominant (DFW, MIA, CLT, LAX)

We see a lot of them at MSP too. I don't know how US competed with AA and DL into MSP (plus SY and WN, etc.) on the routes with E Jets.



Caleb Williams MSP AUS STL AMS CPH LGW YYZ
User currently offlinephxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 833 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 28065 times:

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 13):

Not a chance. Boeing is one of the biggest creditors needed to approve this merger on the AA side. The days of US only ordering Airbus are long gone. Will they stay a massive Airbus customer - more than likely but it's a win win for both manufacturers.


User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1446 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 27683 times:

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 15):
The question of what happens with the Express/Eagle fleet is a really interesting one. The Dash 8 fleet, in particular, serves a very specific role for US, and I'm really curious to see what the future is for the regionals in this merger.

it is possible this merger will be bad news for the smaller cities in SC and NC and VA. They could lose all service if the props go away.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5672 posts, RR: 48
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 27647 times:

AA still has 58 787 optiosn which I can see the combined company exercising for a mix of 787-9 and 787-10s. Those airplanes can replace all the 767s, A330s, and 777-200s and they go to one fleet type on those airplanes.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineunityofsaints From Ireland, joined Nov 2011, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 28508 times:

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 22):
Boeing is one of the biggest creditors

Airbus isn't a creditor? A 130-plane order says otherwise.


User currently offlinena From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10365 posts, RR: 11
Reply 26, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 28466 times:

One thing I expect from a merger is the accelerated retirement of US´ old 737-400 fleet.
I could also think of AA changing the A350 order to some A380s. After a merger they should be able to fill VLAs.


User currently offlineiFlyLOTs From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 433 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 29013 times:

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 25):
Airbus isn't a creditor? A 130-plane order says otherwise.

The order wasn't finalized until recently, and even then, Boeing is still a much larger creditor if you consider all the 737s, 777s and 787s that American has ordered.



"...stay hungry, stay foolish" -Steve Jobs
User currently offlineBeardown91737 From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 433 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 28902 times:

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 1):
...retirement of US oldest airframes, as well as the cancellation of their A350XWB order.

Now that AA's 787 order is firmed up, it would make no sense whatsoever to hold onto these airplanes.

they would have to wait until the 787 itself is firmed up before taking any such action



135 hrs PIC (mostly PA-28) - not current. Landings at MDW, PIA, JAN.
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 29, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 28934 times:

The A350 and 787 orders just don't fit particularly well together. I would agree that the most logical outcome would be to convert the A350 order into additional A32S orders, possibly deferred well into the future and intended to be replacements for the early US A320s and the first batch of AA 738s.


Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineKaiTak747 From Switzerland, joined Aug 2012, 156 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 28578 times:

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 13):

Will this be the first "pro-Airbus" megacarrier in The States? United has Boeing fans in management now. Delta has exclusively bought Boeing since the merger. Ex-USAir management, however, likes Airbus.

Personally I think it will be cool if it works out like this. Variety is the spice of life!

The management do not have a bias towards either Airbus or Boeing. Decisions on orders will be based on cost, availability, finance, fuel burn, capacity...etc.

Both manufacturers will be weighed up before any decision is made. If AA and US do merge, the single largest airline in the world will be created (something like over 1000 aircraft) and therefore will have no choice (and would be nuts anyway) to stick with one manufacture.

Also, bare in mind that fleet commonality is only really a serious benefit with smaller airlines without multiple hubs.


User currently offlineboeing773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 392 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 28547 times:

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 25):

Well in the new company Airbus will still be part of the creditors but will not be as large as Boeing. Airbus helped out US when they were going through bankruptcy so they got some share. At the most they will be about 8-9% of the company ( I figured they could only own 25% at the most of US stock, but probably less then that, then they would only have 30% of that much stock in the new AA)

I don't see US/AA canceling their A350's, they can use them in the future. Eventually the 77W will get older, and they will need a program to replace them with. The A350 program will hopefully be that one.

I can see it going like this: the A350 and the 777 will work together at AA
The 77W's would go on trunk routes out of DFW/MIA while the A350 would work out of PHL/JFK/CLT. To offer a more premium cabin, people are attracted to a new aircraft (look at the 787, when it was flying...)

Hopefully the new airline will be smart enough to make their A350's into A359 or even the A351.



Work Hard, Fly Right.
User currently offlinephxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 833 posts, RR: 1
Reply 32, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 28182 times:

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 25):

Wrong. AA hasn't taken any deliveries from Airbus so technically their only liabilities would be the cancellation payments - if there are even any.

But your right in the sense that later in this year Airbus will be a big time creditor of the combined mega company.


User currently offlinegingersnap From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2010, 892 posts, RR: 5
Reply 33, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 27705 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 29):
The A350 and 787 orders just don't fit particularly well together

Tell that to the airlines that have ordered both.



Flown on: A306 A319/20/21 A332 B732/3/4/5/7/8 B742/4 B752 B762/3 B772/W C152 E195 F70/100 MD-82 Q400
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3378 posts, RR: 3
Reply 34, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 27536 times:

Quoting dallasnewark (Reply 20):
The chance of PHX getting a SYD flight are remotely low. Phoenix does not offer the same number of connections DFW can, so what would be the point of flying into PHX if they have multiple flights to LAX. Why does anyone think that Phoenix and Charlotte would get more international service after the merger, the opposite will be true. Mergers cut flights and streamline operations, it is not the other way around

Or LAX which is only half an hour away by air from PHX. I completely agree though, if anything, PHX is going to contract with LAX being as close as it is and DFW being not too far away either. I don't see an increase in international service, let alone a near ULH route like SYD.



PHX based
User currently offlineEricAY05 From Finland, joined Sep 2010, 92 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 27471 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):

Wouldn't the 767-200ER's of US (delivered in 1997) be a perfect replacement for AA's old 767-200ER? This way the airline could continue serving JFK-LAX with a widebody (as the only airline doing so?). I would imagine that this would give them an advantage over the narrow-body users.


User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4124 posts, RR: 6
Reply 36, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 27293 times:

The 737-400's will be quickly retired as soon as the ink is dry. No point in keeping them around any longer. As for the rest of the types I will handle it type by type.

E190 - I don't remember how big the F100 fleet became before it was retired, but the E190 can serve a role similar to what the F100 did. The only issue is they don't have a lot of the type, and with all the A320-737 family planes on order, would they be willing to take on a few more 190s?

737NG - I would still expect this fleet to be the backbone of the MIA hub given the type of flying handled from there. You will probably see a lot of these in DFW and LAX as well.

A320 family - This is going to become the backbone of the domestic transcon fleet. I suspect that the A321 will be used on a lot of transcons out of LAX to places like BOS, JFK, and DCA (Assuming they can get an LAX slot for DCA) You will see the A319s in ORD in large numbers, and of course they will continue to be the backbone of PHL and CLT.

757 - You would think this would be close to retirement but there are still a lot of routes where this plane is appropriate. (Hawaii and parts of latin america come to mind) I expect this plane to be phased out domestically as more A321's come online, and then to keep a few for ETOPS until they can find an adequate replacement.

767 - The US 200s will be retired quickly. The 300's will remain until enough 787's come on line. I suspect though that some of the JFK planes will be shifted to PHL temporarily for A330's.

A330 - These planes are fairly new in the US fleet and I don't see them going anywhere. I do see them being shifted around though, and I have a feeling these planes are going to end up in JFK long term.

777 - Most of the routes AA currently uses this on are routes where this is the only plane capable, so I don't see much there. One question though is now that PHL is open, can there be a launch of PHL-NRT service?

787 - Eventually, the PHL hub is going to be rightsized into this airplane for the most part. But there are plenty of options from all hubs here. Could AA try LAX-SYD with this plane and supplement QF with one world? I also look for some new Asia routes to be launched from both LAX and ORD.

A350 - This is the one that is the most unclear. Will they or won't they take delivery? I don't see a conversion to A320 series aircraft because that would give them more narrowbodies then they know what to do with, unless they want to reduce dependence on regional lift (one can only hope), If they take delivery, with the existing planes, they can build quite an international network.

Time will tell.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 8773 posts, RR: 29
Reply 37, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 27128 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 18):
I would expect all of the A350-800s to be changed to A350-900s and combined with the 787-9s to become A330-300 and 777-200ER replacements.

  

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 29):
The A350 and 787 orders just don't fit particularly well together.

Other airlines have ordered both. Just look at Air France, with orders for 25 787 and A350 aircraft.

I however don't see both 787-9 and A350-800 working together, but the A350-900 will fit perfectly in between the 787 and the 777.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 24):
AA still has 58 787 optiosn which I can see the combined company exercising for a mix of 787-9 and 787-10s. Those airplanes can replace all the 767s, A330s, and 777-200s and they go to one fleet type on those airplanes.

Based on the information available today the 787-10 will not be a real replacement for the 777-200. It will be more a truly A330-300 replacer, so the A350-900 sounds like the logical outcome to replace the 777-200.

[Edited 2013-02-08 10:37:27]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinecrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 734 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 26168 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A350s will be converted to A380s within the next 2 years with delivery set for 2017. You heard it hear first.   

User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12041 posts, RR: 47
Reply 39, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 26051 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 29):
The A350 and 787 orders just don't fit particularly well together.

So Aeroflot, Air China, Air France, Avianca, Ethiopian, Etihad, Qatar Airways, Singapore Airlines and Vietnam Airlines have all got it wrong?   



Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently offlinehoMsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1107 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 25712 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 39):

So Aeroflot, Air China, Air France, Avianca, Ethiopian, Etihad, Qatar Airways, Singapore Airlines and Vietnam Airlines have all got it wrong?

Don't forget United. While the 787s they have right now are from the original CO order, UA did have 787s and A350s of their own on order, and, IIRC, they ordered both at the same time.



I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently offlinecrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 734 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 25431 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting scbriml (Reply 39):
So Aeroflot, Air China, Air France, Avianca, Ethiopian, Etihad, Qatar Airways, Singapore Airlines and Vietnam Airlines have all got it wrong?
Quoting seabosdca (Reply 29):
The A350 and 787 orders just don't fit particularly well together.

There are so many variables that come into play here you can't just say one person is right or wrong. It depends on aircraft type (there are soon to be 3 versions of each offered) and on aircraft configuration (F? J? W? Y?).

For example:

AA is now taking delivery of it's 77W in 4 class configuration (8F, 52J, 20W, 220Y) seating 310 and will be converting all their 772s to the new J, W, and Y - exact numbers for configuration unknown but in current 3 class (F,J,Y) seats 247.

US will be taking delivery of 18 A350-800s in 2 class configuration (36J, 234Y) seating 270 and 4 A350-900s in 2 class configuration (36J, 294Y) seating 330.

A combined US/AA now have to decide how they want to configure the A350s on order. I hope it's safe to say that MCE will be added across both fleets. So if the new carrier might decided that for the A350-800 to add an extra row or two of J and add a W cabin brining the configuration more in line with the 772. Voila!! You now have a wonderful replacement aircraft for your aging 772 fleet.

However, you do the same work over with the A350-900 it probably becomes too large for you missions with just J,W,Y and if you add F, J, W, Y to the A350-900 it will closely resemble your new 77Ws making the A350-900 unnecessary.

Most are in agreement that the 787s will be replacing the 767s so I don't think the 787 order will play any role in the A350 decision.

My guess is the A350 order will stay but be converted to all A350-800s with more added to replace the aging 772s or someone in the new AA/US will get overly ambitious combined with an enticing offer from Airbus and we'll see an A380 order in a few years.


User currently offlinejporterfi From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 425 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 25454 times:

Quoting scouseflyer (Reply 5):
A VLA could be brilliant - just like the thought of an A380 in the new AA colours 

Oh god, so repulsing. I think the new livery would look better on a 748. But honestly, I can't see AA ordering either one of those. 77Ws seem like a better fit for their overall route network.

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
I could see AMR/regionals placing a substantial order for Q400s or ATR72s to fill this role

Isn't AA terminated much of the ATR-72 flying as it' s shutting down its SJU hub and terminating its contract with Executive? I think a Q400 order is much more likely. Aren't they more fuel efficient than the ATRs? Having flown on both, I greatly prefer the Q400.

Quoting dallasnewark (Reply 20):
The chance of PHX getting a SYD flight are remotely low. Phoenix does not offer the same number of connections DFW can, so what would be the point of flying into PHX if they have multiple flights to LAX.

   The general opinion is that PHX will be streamlined, and lose much of its service. With fewer connections, PHX-SYD does not make much sense. QF (or AA, if they decide to start service to SYD) would be better off adding a frequency to DFW or LAX.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 43, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 25208 times:

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 41):
Most are in agreement that the 787s will be replacing the 767s so I don't think the 787 order will play any role in the A350 decision.

Not totally true. AA has orders or options for 100 787s, which would come close to replacing both the 763 and 772 fleets. Furthermore, the 787-9 is much closer to the size of a 772 than the size of a 763. I think AA was planning eventually to replace their 772 fleet with the 787-9, not just their 763 fleet.

The A350-800 is a bit of a redheaded stepchild. The A350-900 is just a better-conceived aircraft. If the merger goes through I feel absolutely confident that any A350s actually delivered to the merged airline will be either A350-900s or A350-1000s. The trouble is that the A350-900s are only a bit bigger than 787-9s, and the A350-1000s would be playing in the same sandbox as the airline's brand-new 777-300ERs.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29690 posts, RR: 84
Reply 44, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 24855 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 43):
Furthermore, the 787-9 is much closer to the size of a 772 than the size of a 763.

The 787-9 is identical in cabin length to the 777-200 so AA would be able to fit the same number of rows of their new product in the 787-9 as they will in the 777-200ER.


User currently offlineAVLAirlineFreq From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 971 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 24755 times:

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 23):

it is possible this merger will be bad news for the smaller cities in SC and NC and VA. They could lose all service if the props go away.

There are a few markets that are served daily only by US, mostly in the southeast: FLO, LYH, PGV, HHH, SBY (which is Piedmont's base for the Dash), HTS (which also has G4), HVN, and IPT. Did I miss anyone?

Some of those may be too small to support even reduced frequency service on a 70-seater prop.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 8773 posts, RR: 29
Reply 46, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 24557 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 44):
The 787-9 is identical in cabin length to the 777-200 so AA would be able to fit the same number of rows of their new product in the 787-9 as they will in the 777-200ER.

I'm not following here, Boeing lists 314 seats for the 777-200ER and 290 for the 787-9, both in a 3-class configuration. A difference of 24 seats or ~ 3 rows.

[Edited 2013-02-08 12:25:15]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1492 posts, RR: 1
Reply 47, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 23963 times:

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 41):
or someone in the new AA/US will get overly ambitious combined with an enticing offer from Airbus and we'll see an A380 order in a few years.

Come on now, on what routes would AA fly a 380? I think AA's model, as well as most other US airlines, is frequency over capacity. Maybe, maybe AA could get away with 380s flying between JFK - LHR, but where else? Sao Paulo? I think AA will have to dramatically change its business practices and become extremely aggressive if it wants to grab enough market share to fill the 380 on a regular basis.


User currently offlinehoMsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1107 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 23887 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 46):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 44):
The 787-9 is identical in cabin length to the 777-200 so AA would be able to fit the same number of rows of their new product in the 787-9 as they will in the 777-200ER.

I'm not following here, Boeing lists 314 seats for the 777-200ER and 290 for the 787-9, both in a 3-class configuration. A difference of 24 seats or ~ 3 rows.

The 787 is narrower than the 777. You can't do 10-across in a 787, but you could in a 777. Same number of rows still gives you more seats in a 777.



I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 49, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 23664 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 44):
The 787-9 is identical in cabin length to the 777-200 so AA would be able to fit the same number of rows of their new product in the 787-9 as they will in the 777-200ER.

Since the new 777 product is 10Y, that will still leave the 787-9 with a slight capacity deficit to the 777 in Y. If that won't work, perhaps some of those options will be exercised as 787-10s, or perhaps the combined airline will keep the A350 order and convert it to A350-900s.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29690 posts, RR: 84
Reply 50, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 23514 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 46):
I'm not following here, Boeing lists 314 seats for the 777-200ER and 290 for the 787-9, both in a 3-class configuration. A difference of 24 seats or ~ 3 rows.

The difference in length between the passenger cabin of the 777-200 and the 787-9 is 29cm.

As such, I would put down the difference in seating due to a difference in the number of rows of First, Business and Economy seating and that the 777 seats 2+3+2 in Business versus 2+2+2 on the 787.


Quoting hoMsar (Reply 48):
The 787 is narrower than the 777. You can't do 10-across in a 787, but you could in a 777. Same number of rows still gives you more seats in a 777.

Yes, but that same limitation applies to the A350-900, as well. That being said, the A350-900 can fit three more rows of Economy seats, however, so it would better be able to make up the gap to a 10-abreast AA 777-200ER than the 787-9 can.

As such, we might see the 787-9 being deployed on "premium" 777-200ER routes with four-classes of service (First, Business, Main Cabin Extra and Economy) and the A350-900 sent on more "leisure" routes with three classes of service (Business, Main Cabin Extra and Economy).

[Edited 2013-02-08 13:19:22]

User currently offlinecrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 734 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 23392 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Again I think the key here is what configuration AA chooses for their 787-9s. Allow me to illustrate my point:

AA will soon have the following aircraft and configurations:

77W (8F,52J,30W,220Y) T=310
772 (?J ?W ?Y) T=? (likely more in line with the existing 763s)
763* (30J,21W,163Y) T=214
* configuration may be changing pending decision if/how to install new J cabin

What routes will AA likely be using its 77Ws?
LHR, GRU, EZE?, NRT?, new?

Is AA going to choose to install an F cabin in the 787-9 and use the plane on premium routes as well as to open new premium routes?
DFW-ICN, ORD-PVG, ORD-PEK, LAX-PVG, MIA-SCL, MIA-NRT?, MIA-JNB?, etc.

Is AA going to choose to configure the 787-9 with J/W/Y only and put it on secondary routes?
CDG,FRA,MAD,BCN

If AA is going to have a greater need for a 787-9 with an F cabin and all the 772s are going to be converted into a three class configuration which seem to be serving as a replacement for older 763s - then I'd say the 787-9 is going to be a replacment for the Flagship 772s.

If AA plans on growing it's 77W fleet and adding A350-900s to the fleet with a F cabin then I suspect the 787-9 will be serving more as a 763 replacement.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 52, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 22949 times:

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 28):
they would have to wait until the 787 itself is firmed up before taking any such action


I thought it was firmed up.

Quoting EricAY05 (Reply 35):
Wouldn't the 767-200ER's of US (delivered in 1997) be a perfect replacement for AA's old 767-200ER? This way the airline could continue serving JFK-LAX with a widebody (as the only airline doing so?). I would imagine that this would give them an advantage over the narrow-body users.

No. That is the primary function of the A321's soon to be in their fleet.

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 41):
will be converting all their 772s to the new J, W, and Y - exact numbers for configuration unknown but in current 3 class (F,J,Y) seats 247.

I have not seen anything about this yet, do you have a source?

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 46):
I'm not following here, Boeing lists 314 seats for the 777-200ER and 290 for the 787-9, both in a 3-class configuration. A difference of 24 seats or ~ 3 rows.

They will figure out a way for the 787-9 to have 10 across.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineMCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8625 posts, RR: 15
Reply 53, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 22699 times:

1st: The first thing that will happen to the 734's and 762's will be retired first with A321's, and A332's right away whether they be new or newly used 2nd hand examples in order to accelerate both types.

2nd: The MD80's have their fate sealed as well. I see accelerated deliveries of A320's to replace both MD82 and MD83.

3rd: The widebody fleet: I see AA/US hanging on to their 772ER's. They fill a role and do it well. However, I see older 763ER a/c being retired and replaced with new Airbus A330 a/c.

4th: The 757 fleet: I see AA/US keeping its newest 752's for ETOPS for Trans Atlantic and missions for Hawaii. I see older a/c and the ones AA rejected on lease going to the boneyard right away.

5th: The Airbus and Boeing narrowbody fleet: I see AA/US accelerating deliveries of both the 738 and A320 series to replace the oldest 320's, and more options converted into orders for the A320 NEO and 737maxx. The combined airline has well over 150+ planes they need to replace. The only solution is accelerated a/c deliveries and good used 2nd hand a/c to make this happen.

KH



Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 8773 posts, RR: 29
Reply 54, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 22189 times:

Quoting hoMsar (Reply 48):
The 787 is narrower than the 777. You can't do 10-across in a 787, but you could in a 777. Same number of rows still gives you more seats in a 777.

Of course, how could I forget. The 777 can do 10 abreast in Y so it can hold more seats while having the same length as the 787-9.

Quote:
Yes, but that same limitation applies to the A350-900, as well. That being said, the A350-900 can fit three more rows of Economy seats, however, so it would better be able to make up the gap to a 10-abreast AA 777-200ER than the 787-9 can.

Well, you've given the answer. The longer fuselage of the A350-900 compensates for the 10 abreast seats on the 777. In the end both 772 and A359 can have 314 seats in a 3 class configuration.

That's why I believe the A359 is a better 772 replacer than the 787-9. The 787 family should replace the 767/A330 models.

Quote:
As such, we might see the 787-9 being deployed on "premium" 777-200ER routes with four-classes of service (First, Business, Main Cabin Extra and Economy) and the A350-900 sent on more "leisure" routes with three classes of service (Business, Main Cabin Extra and Economy).

That's indeed another possibility.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 52):
They will figure out a way for the 787-9 to have 10 across.

So imagine what 10-abreast in the A350 would do   However, such a configuration in both 787 and A350 - if ever possible - will not provide the same comfort as in the 777.

[Edited 2013-02-08 14:07:16]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineanfromme From Ireland, joined Feb 2012, 395 posts, RR: 11
Reply 55, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 22013 times:

Quoting seatback (Reply 10):
I completely agree that the A350 orders will be cancelled in favor of more A319/21's. Although Airbus could use the heft of an AA order for the A350 program, at the end of the day they'll be ok with an order for more A319/21's.

I see no more reason for a merged AA/US to cancel their A350 order than for a merged CO/UA to cancel their A350 order.
I .e. the only reason I could think of would be wishful thinking on the part of some people that seem to take offense at the idea of A350s in AAs and UAs fleets, respectively.



Sláinte!
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 56, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 21967 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 52):
They will figure out a way for the 787-9 to have 10 across.

Unlikely. That would result in seats under 16" wide.

The A350 10Y configuration will already be one of the narrowest ever sold.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 57, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 21976 times:

Quoting anfromme (Reply 55):
I see no more reason for a merged AA/US to cancel their A350 order than for a merged CO/UA to cancel their A350 order.

There are two differences:

1) UA only has a few 787-9s on order, with large and aging 772 and 744 fleets to be replaced, while AA has many 787-9s and a newer 772 fleet; and

2) UA could logically and easily upgrade to A350-1000s to replace 744s, whereas AA just ordered 77Ws in the larger size class.

I have no problem with Airbus, but I see that the A350 order is a more difficult fit at a combined AA/US than it is at UA.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 792 posts, RR: 0
Reply 58, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 20251 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 1):

Cancel the A350 order?? Why is that a good idea?? The 787 and the A350 are not even similar. Now if you were talking about cancelling the A350 order in the face of the 777-300LR? Now that would make sense. More than likely US is not going to want to cancel that order if for no other reason than to have an alternative. It was rumored when the UA/CO merger happened that the A350 would be cancelled. and that hasn't happened either and the leadership is still looking at the 747-8I as well. So obviously Opinion isn't counting for much.


User currently offlinePanAmPaul From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 19911 times:

AA today firmed up orders with Boeing and Airbus for almost 250 aircraft.

American Finalizes Aircraft Orders With Airbus and Boeing, Expects 787s in Late 2014

"American Airlines is moving ahead with its new aircraft orders. Boeing today announced that American Airlines officially confirmed an order for 143 new aircraft, including 42 787 Dreamliners that were first ordered by the carrier in 2008.

Airbus similarly said that American had confirmed an order for 130 A321neo jet aircraft....."


User currently offlineunityofsaints From Ireland, joined Nov 2011, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 19634 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 29):

The A350 and 787 orders just don't fit particularly well together.

"The A330 and 777 orders just don't fit particularly well together" - that's something no one will ever say, but for the 787 and A350 it's a popular opinion, for whatever illogical reason.

Quoting KaiTak747 (Reply 30):
The management do not have a bias towards either Airbus or Boeing. Decisions on orders will be based on cost, availability, finance, fuel burn, capacity...etc.

Look at a listing of U.S. Airway's fleet and please tell me someone assessing airplanes solely on their capabilities and building a fleet from scratch would build one so heavily biased towards one manufacturer. Look at the CO pre-merger fleet and say the same for them. I don't think it's a bad thing, but manufacturer bias does exist.

Quoting boeing773ER (Reply 31):
Well in the new company Airbus will still be part of the creditors but will not be as large as Boeing.

I just stated they were a creditor, I didn't comment on their size relative to Boeing.

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 32):
Wrong. AA hasn't taken any deliveries from Airbus so technically their only liabilities would be the cancellation payments - if there are even any.

You are contradicting yourself here - either AA is not a creditor of Airbus or cancellation payments are owed, the two are mutually exclusive.


User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5107 posts, RR: 4
Reply 61, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 19521 times:

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 60):
"The A330 and 777 orders just don't fit particularly well together" - that's something no one will ever say, but for the 787 and A350 it's a popular opinion, for whatever illogical reason.

I wouldn't be saying it if the A350s involved were -1000s. But buying A350-1000s makes no sense for AA/US when they are just starting to receive 20 brand-new 777-300ERs. And the A330-300 and 777-200ER are far more different in capability and weight than the 787-9 and A350-900.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 58):
The 787 and the A350 are not even similar.

  

We are talking about the 787-9 and the A350-900. They have almost identical capabilities. The A350-900 has a few more seats and a couple hundred more nm of range than the 787-9, while the 787-9 is just a tiny bit lighter. They are direct competitors and astonishingly similar.



Most gorgeous aircraft: Tu-204-300, 757-200, A330-200, 777-200LR, 787-8
User currently offlinejayunited From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 62, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 19430 times:

I think AA will keep the A350-9 that US ordered reason being the new AA will need them. While the 773 take over some flying that the 772 are currently doing AA's 787-9 are to serve as a replacement for AA's 767-3 fleet. All of US's A330 are being used and the A330 US will take delievery of will probably replace their aging 767-2 fleet. The A350's US airways ordered as supposed to be delivered starting in 2016 if I'm not mistaken AA could use those planes to expand and increase their presence in Asia and S.E. Asia. The A350 and 787 can work together in the same fleet because AA could used them on different routes just like UA is planning to do.

Another reason why I don't see AA/US canceling their A350 order is because US airways management is supposed to be taking over the new AA and US loves Airbus aircraft.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11129 posts, RR: 62
Reply 63, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 19170 times:

Quoting EricAY05 (Reply 35):
Wouldn't the 767-200ER's of US (delivered in 1997) be a perfect replacement for AA's old 767-200ER?

Some of US' 767s are just as old as AA's - both fleets are quite old.

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 42):
Isn't AA terminated much of the ATR-72 flying as it' s shutting down its SJU hub and terminating its contract with Executive? I think a Q400 order is much more likely. Aren't they more fuel efficient than the ATRs? Having flown on both, I greatly prefer the Q400.

The ATR72s Executive is getting rid of are ancient models, not the far more comfortable and efficient -600s ATR is now producing.

I think AMR could go with either ATR72s or Q400s, although each has its pluses and minuses. The Q400s are certainly quieter, faster, and arguably more comfortable, although they also have higher unit costs and apparently (at least at several operators) can be "challenging" when it comes to maintenance and reliability. The ATR72s, on the other hand, are slower and louder, but much cheaper to operate. Personally, I would say the economics in this case favor the ATR72, but that's just my guess.

Either way, I think one thing is clear: there are lots of markets in the AA network - both as it exists today and in the US network AA may soon be absorbing - where a prop is an economic necessity and an RJ is a non-starter. Many of the Dash 8 markets Piedmont serves out of PHL and CLT, plus many shorter Eagle markets out of ORD, DFW, MIA and even LAX, are perfectly suited to a reliable, cheap (unit cost) 70-seat prop.

I fully expect AMR to get some at some point in the not too distant future.


User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2048 posts, RR: 1
Reply 64, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 19047 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 63):
Some of US' 767s are just as old as AA's - both fleets are quite old.

The newest one was built in '93. I suspect EricAY05 saw when they were technically operated as US Airways, and not when they were delivered to USAir.


User currently offlinephxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 833 posts, RR: 1
Reply 65, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 18270 times:

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 60):
You are contradicting yourself here - either AA is not a creditor of Airbus or cancellation payments are owed, the two are mutually exclusive.

First off ... I would hope AA is not a creditor of Airbus as funds would be rather tight. Second ... I don't know how many members have to tell you this repeatedly but Boeing is on the creditor committee for AA's BK proceedings and Airbus is not.

For your reference here is an article.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...udes-unions-bondholders-banks.html


User currently offlineAngMoh From Singapore, joined Nov 2011, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 17520 times:

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 65):
First off ... I would hope AA is not a creditor of Airbus as funds would be rather tight. Second ... I don't know how many members have to tell you this repeatedly but Boeing is on the creditor committee for AA's BK proceedings and Airbus is not.

Just being on the creditor committee does not give you the power to have all contracts with your competitor cancelled. The members are a cross section of creditors and it is their legal obligation to secure the best result for ALL creditors, not only themselves. In theory, if buying A planes gives the best results for all creditors, they need to go with it. In reality, being in the creditor committee gives you an advantage, but not to the extend that AA has to be an all B airline. And that is confirmed by the fact that the NEO order was firmed up this week.


User currently offlineetops1 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1038 posts, RR: 1
Reply 67, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 16631 times:

Hell , there might not be an A350 all together .
http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/05/air...n_1005airbus.html?partner=yahootix


User currently offlineEricAY05 From Finland, joined Sep 2010, 92 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 16231 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 52):
No. That is the primary function of the A321's soon to be in their fleet.

That's a pity. I really hate the 3-3 configuration on any flight over 3h. Most people probably agree.

Quoting commavia (Reply 63):
Some of US' 767s are just as old as AA's - both fleets are quite old.

You're right. The info at planespotters.net got me confused. Forgot about the US Air -> US Airways in 1997.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 69, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 16224 times:

Quoting etops1 (Reply 67):
Hell , there might not be an A350 all together .
http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/05/air...ootix

You do realize this article is from 2006?



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5283 posts, RR: 29
Reply 70, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 15957 times:

Quoting anfromme (Reply 55):

I see no more reason for a merged AA/US to cancel their A350 order than for a merged CO/UA to cancel their A350 order.
I .e. the only reason I could think of would be wishful thinking on the part of some people that seem to take offense at the idea of A350s in AAs and UAs fleets, respectively.

So the only reason you can see for them to not want to take the A350's is someone's bias here? I thought there were some very logical reasons posted above on why - in this particular merger's fleet - that might make sense. For example, the large number of 787's on order and option relative to the 358/359 order, the presence of the brand new 77W orders being delivered, etc. If you have a 763/788/789/77E/77W fleet, in the near term at least it's mildly understandable that a 350 might be superfluous.

Now, having said that, I'm not personally suggesting that they will cancel it (though I hope they don't take the 358) but I could see them pull a Delta/787 deferral with the 350's, putting them off until they are ready for a 351 in the early-mid 20's.

Quoting unityofsaints (Reply 60):
Look at a listing of U.S. Airway's fleet and please tell me someone assessing airplanes solely on their capabilities and building a fleet from scratch would build one so heavily biased towards one manufacturer. Look at the CO pre-merger fleet and say the same for them. I don't think it's a bad thing, but manufacturer bias does exist.

US Airways placed their HUGE A32X order back in the 90's as a cost-effective way of consolidating their narrowbody types. I think Stephen Wolfe worked out the order, having developed a good relationship with Airbus prior to that. It also came on the heels (relatively speaking) of the US 427 737 crash and litigation. Since then, they have ordered some A330's and added on to their A32X fleet in a logical manner, but management has changed a few times and I don't see that they are beholden to Airbus.

CO clearly had a Boeing bias from the Bethune era and it seemed to work fine for them. However, I think the jury is still out on whether UA will be a longterm Boeing stronghold or whether the NEO will work it's way into the fleet. Surely the A350 seems to be a permanent addition so there is opportunity for both manufacturers there.

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offlineantoniemey From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1531 posts, RR: 4
Reply 71, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 15508 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 70):
CO clearly had a Boeing bias from the Bethune era and it seemed to work fine for them.

Which is in part because Bethune was at Boeing before going to CO and in part because Boeing helped to save CO's bacon when it was weeks from shutting down. CO also already had orders with Boeing for narrowbodies and DESPERATELY needed to rationalize its fleet. And once you have the type on property, may as well get more of them when you need more planes.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 70):
However, I think the jury is still out on whether UA will be a longterm Boeing stronghold or whether the NEO will work it's way into the fleet.

Probably depends on its performance on various missions and how badly they need new frames in a given period of time. I would think it's a definite possibility that we'll see them sporting a globe.



Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 18704 posts, RR: 58
Reply 72, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 15355 times:

Quoting EricAY05 (Reply 35):
Wouldn't the 767-200ER's of US (delivered in 1997) be a perfect replacement for AA's old 767-200ER?

You need to think of a 762 as being sort of like a 753 with a 10+ hour range. It's good at very long, very thin routes and not much else.


User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2027 posts, RR: 4
Reply 73, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 15309 times:

Quoting etops1 (Reply 67):
Hell , there might not be an A350 all together .
http://www.forbes.com/2006/10/05/air...n_1005airbus.html?partner=yahootix

Nice try!  



Wer wenig weiss muss vieles glauben
User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1834 posts, RR: 4
Reply 74, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 14756 times:

I'm not sure if this was mentioned earlier, but American's order for Airbus all 260 narrowbodies is now firmed as well.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ican-order-to-firm-backlog-382104/

Apparently, the NEO part of the order will belong to A321 only. So I guess that would reduce the backlog for A319NEO to Republic Airways order only.

Therefore, I guess we'll see the following mainline types for the new AA: A319, 737-800, 737-8, A321, A321neo, 757-200, 767-300ER, 787-8, 787-9, 777-200ER and 777-300ER.



All Hail Mighty Triple Seven, The MURDERER of the so-called "Queen"!!!!
User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4265 posts, RR: 34
Reply 75, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 14482 times:

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 74):
Therefore, I guess we'll see the following mainline types for the new AA: A319, 737-800, 737-8, A321, A321neo, 757-200, 767-300ER, 787-8, 787-9, 777-200ER and 777-300ER.

What year do you think Americans fleet would be like this?
I think the 757, 777-200ER and 767-300ER will be gone sooner then the US Airways inheritance; loads of 320s (current generation), A-330s and the ordered 350s.
I think a 787/A350/77W mix will work out perfectly, the 350s, 800s swapped and expanded to a mix of 900s and 1000s, can replace the 777-200ERs and the 330-300s while the 787 can replace the 767s and the 330-200s.

I can see them fly in 2020 this fleet:
400 x 737-8/8MAX
500 x A319/20/21 ceo and neo
60 x 787-8/9
50 x A350-900/1000
25 x 77W
perhaps a smaller mainline jet, the ERJ-190 or CSeries
748 or 380 unlikely as they didn't even fly anything bigger then a 772 til last year unlike Delta and United.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8092 posts, RR: 7
Reply 76, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 14399 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting crAAzy (Reply 51):
AA will soon have the following aircraft and configurations:77W (8F,52J,30W,220Y) T=310772 (?J ?W ?Y) T=? (likely more in line with the existing 763s)763* (30J,21W,163Y) T=214

The current 772 has 16 First Class seats taking up lots of real estate, the J number I have seen in the new configuration is 45 J seats. That will occupy less them today's F and J cabins, if AA places 3 rows of W class that is 27 seats plus the 45 J class in the same space a today's F & J that is 72 seats vs. 43. IF they switch coach to 10 seats per row, lets say that is 20 more Y seats. Current y class per seatguru is 190 plus 20 is 210 plus 72 from W and J equals 282.

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 75):
I can see them fly in 2020 this fleet:400 x 737-8/8MAX500 x A319/20/21 ceo and neo60 x 787-8/950 x A350-900/100025 x 77Wperhaps a smaller mainline jet, the ERJ-190 or CSeries748 or 380 unlikely as they didn't even fly anything bigger then a 772 til last year unlike Delta and United.

Many 777-200ER were delivered in 1999 and 2000, to expect them to be out of the fleet by then is wrong.


User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 608 posts, RR: 0
Reply 77, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 14363 times:

AA recently converted some of their B789 orders to the smaller B788. That leaves more room for the A350 (whether -800 or -900) in the combined AA/US fleet.

I would not be surprised to see the 358s converted to 359s. Airbus seems to be trying to encourage customers to do this. And whatever pax numbers assumptions were built into the US business case against which the 358s were ordered is likely to need to be increased as a result of higher pax flow within the merged AA/US.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16694 posts, RR: 51
Reply 78, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 14279 times:

I'm going to miss the US 762s from PHL-MCO. The last of the wide bodies from the Northeast to Florida, we just flew one last December. Since I was kid I've flown EA A300s, L1011s, PA L1011, DC-10, CO A300s, DL L1011s and most recently US 762s to Florida from EWR, JFK, LGA, PHL.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3378 posts, RR: 3
Reply 79, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 13974 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 76):
Many 777-200ER were delivered in 1999 and 2000, to expect them to be out of the fleet by then is wrong.

And a few them have been delivered as recently as 2009. Given AA's low utilization of the 772 fleet, I don't see the 772 fleet being gone by 2020. The fleet collectively has a lot of life left in it.



PHX based
User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4265 posts, RR: 34
Reply 80, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 13862 times:

Quoting 777STL (Reply 79):
And a few them have been delivered as recently as 2009.

The last 223ERs came in 2006, only 2, the bulk is from 1999-2001.
BUT I give in, I agree with STT757 and 777STL, the 772s will most likely stay in the fleet past 2020. In 2020 there will probably even be some A330s, 757s and 767s still operational. The point I wanted to make is were I expect the fleet buildup is heading to and see how others think about that. On the other hand I didn't dare to make a projection for 2025, likely by that time there will be one or two completely new aircraft types which are to be game changers and we don't know about them now.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlinephxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 833 posts, RR: 1
Reply 81, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 13334 times:

Quoting AngMoh (Reply 66):

I was responding to another member that said Airbus was a creditor during BK ... I wasn't saying that it will effect future orders  Smile

[Edited 2013-02-09 16:02:33]

User currently offlinerangercarp From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 13126 times:

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 75):
400 x 737-8/8MAX
500 x A319/20/21 ceo and neo

900 narrow bodies? That sounds very optimistic. The combined fleets are currently at around 800. When the dust finally settles(3 - 5 years) I expect the total narrow body fleet will be between 720 and 770.

Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 53):
I see AA/US accelerating deliveries of both the 738 and A320 series

Several people have suggested this. Those who say retirements will be accelerated are probably right, but there is no need to accelerate new deliveries. First, AA already has a very aggressive delivery schedule. And second, the combined airline will have a smaller fleet that the sum of AA + US current fleets, giving them leeway to offload MD80's and 734's faster than planned, with out speeding up new deliveries as the new airline rationalizes its fleet numbers.

On a semi related note, I see plenty of room for more E190's, or a C-series order...



iwgbtp!
User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 83, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 13016 times:

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 1):
In my opinion, the biggest impact on the merged fleet would be retirement of US oldest airframes, as well as the cancellation of their A350XWB order.

I agree . There is no need for the 350 alongside the 777 and 787. The 350 order could likely be converted into more A32xneo perhaps without penalty.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 84, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 12734 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 56):

Quoting brilondon (Reply 52):
They will figure out a way for the 787-9 to have 10 across.

Unlikely. That would result in seats under 16" wide.

The A350 10Y configuration will already be one of the narrowest ever sold.

I was not all that serious about them finding a way, but if you narrow the aisles by 2" and reduce the width of the armrests and narrow the walls...

Quoting EricAY05 (Reply 68):
That's a pity. I really hate the 3-3 configuration on any flight over 3h. Most people probably agree.

I like don't see what the problem is, flying to Europe or to Hawaii is done on a 757 and the F/J classes are all pretty nice. I don't see them being any different on a 757 or 763.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4361 posts, RR: 2
Reply 85, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 11974 times:

Quoting yyz717 (Reply 83):
There is no need for the 350 alongside the 777 and 787.

Which means there is no need to keep the 777-200... The A350-900 is the 777-200A and 777-200ER replacement.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12041 posts, RR: 47
Reply 86, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 11898 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 85):
The A350-900 is the 777-200A and 777-200ER replacement.

And a significantly more efficient one at that.



Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently offlineLindberghflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2013, 28 posts, RR: 0
Reply 87, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 11781 times:

Does anyone have any insight into what will happen with the configurations of the a320 and a330 aircraft where us has a significantly lower amount of f/j seats than AA has (or will have). Will this eventually be changed (and on which side)? What about MCE?

User currently offlinecrj900lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 281 posts, RR: 0
Reply 88, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 11571 times:

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 15):
The question of what happens with the Express/Eagle fleet is a really interesting one. The Dash 8 fleet, in particular, serves a very specific role for US, and I'm really curious to see what the future is for the regionals in this merger.

Yes they do and it has been talked about for some time as to what is going to replace them. We should know shortly. The first regional a/c on the chopping block is the CRJ-200 and ERJ-145. Expect a reduction of those at a nice pace and replaced with either CRJ-700's or EMB-170/175's on routes that will support them. The 200 and 145 will still be in the fleet but at a much much smaller scale then they are currently. The 900's will be looked at also as they also fill a niche for US, and with the addition of the 170/175's the 900 flying may be spread out even more then just in CLT and PHX where most of it is.


User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1963 posts, RR: 1
Reply 89, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 11514 times:

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 15):
The question of what happens with the Express/Eagle fleet is a really interesting one. The Dash 8 fleet, in particular, serves a very specific role for US, and I'm really curious to see what the future is for the regionals in this merger.

I think they will be gone within five years. Between the difficulties of replacing staff due to various mainline retirements and the need for fleet renewal at all three, I just don't see it being cost effective. Why would they buy/lease new aircraft when they can get someone else to put their credit on the line (and likely do it cheaper)?

Quoting AVLAirlineFreq (Reply 15):
The question of what happens with the Express/Eagle fleet is a really interesting one. The Dash 8 fleet, in particular, serves a very specific role for US, and I'm really curious to see what the future is for the regionals in this merger.

See above

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 23):
it is possible this merger will be bad news for the smaller cities in SC and NC and VA. They could lose all service if the props go away.

If so, many will see reduced service on jets. 2 CRJ 200s instead of three DH8s or something similar. I could even see some cities seeing a terminator at night and originator in the morning, or a single midday turn. I think this is going to happen in a lot of smaller airports in the next 5-7 years. Either that or consolidation into a single airport serving a larger region, but that's the subject of many, many other topics.

Suffice it to say, I think there are going to be major changes at the regional level. I just think that other factors are going to be driving those decisions as much as, or more than, this particular merger will do on its own.


User currently offlinecrj900lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 281 posts, RR: 0
Reply 90, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 11431 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 89):
Why would they buy/lease new aircraft when they can get someone else to put their credit on the line (and likely do it cheaper)?

In that situation you get what you pay for and run the risk of sub standard, unreliable service, which is what we have now with several of our contract carriers. Its a double edged sword in that situation, do we spend the money and keep it in house or do we take the risk and contract it out to save a few bucks and hope the service and reliability are up to the standards that are set.


User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1963 posts, RR: 1
Reply 91, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 11385 times:

Quoting crj900lr (Reply 90):

In that situation you get what you pay for and run the risk of sub standard, unreliable service, which is what we have now with several of our contract carriers. Its a double edged sword in that situation, do we spend the money and keep it in house or do we take the risk and contract it out to save a few bucks and hope the service and reliability are up to the standards that are set.

Considering that the fleet plan for Piedmont hasn't included new frames since the merger and they will have to retire at least three frames this year when they hit 80k cycles plus the fact that have reduced fleet by something like 1/3 over the last five years, I think the handwriting is all over the wall there.


User currently offlinePHLBOS From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7482 posts, RR: 24
Reply 92, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 10522 times:

My    on the matter.

If the merger goes through as planned:

Planned retirements of MD-80s & 733 (I think US still has one or two of those still flying, at least they did a few months ago) / 734 will be accelerated as redundant routes are axed, other routes rationalized and newer 737NG & A32X aircraft are added (note: I can easily see one carrier's Airbus current narrowbody order either consolidated or dropped in favor the other carrier's current order).

What surprised me about the 787 vs. A350 in this particular thread is that despite the 90+ posts, one item has been completely overlooked; which aircraft is more readily available for delivery today? A bird in the hand is worth two in a bush.

If AA/US want to retire their older 767s post-haste; I could see them staying with AA's 787 order for replacement aircraft and delaying or deferring US' original A350 for the simple reason being that no A350s being delivered nor flying right now. The 787, despite a recent but temporary hiccup w/their battery issue(s), are presently being delivered and flown by other carriers. IIRC, the first A350s won't be delivered to any carrier until mid-2014 (-900)/mid-2016 (-800)/mid-2017(-1000). As we've all seen, anything can happen in even just 2 years time.

Conversely, should the 787 encounter more issues that would force further groundings; the A350's later launch could work in its favor. Airbus can apply any design or parts-related lessons learned remedies prior to its launch.

Personal take: yes, pre-Parker US has not ordered any factory-fresh Boeing product since the early-to-mid 1990s (due to the fallout of the Flight 427 crash); but since the HP merger, US indeed picked up some former-TZ(?) ETOPS 752s to fly on their thinner transatlantic routes. These 757s are reg. #s N20(#)UU and have been retrofitted w/blended winglets. Side bar question: how many of HP's 757s were delivered to them factory fresh?

As with the HP merger eradicating US' perceived aversion/animosity towards taking delivery of used Boeing aircraft, this merger could eradicate once and for all any aversion/animosity (again, perceived) that US had w/new Boeings.

That said, let's not forget when US actually made the order for the A350... shortly after the kibosh was placed on their attempted take-over of DL (a prominent Boeing customer). DP may have indeed placed that order just to spite Boeing (who may have assisted/helped in halting the attempted take-over) at the time. Given the fact that his order for former AC-A340s (planes they were supposed to pick up and use for their touted PHL-Asia routes) never happened; similar could be said about his A350 order, especially since the type isn't even flying yet never mind getting them from another carrier.

Like the above aborted A340 order; I will believe the A350 order when I actually see the plane flying in their colors.



"TransEastern! You'll feel like you've never left the ground because we treat you like dirt!" SNL Parady ad circa 1981
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29690 posts, RR: 84
Reply 93, posted (1 year 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 10443 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 92):
What surprised me about the 787 vs. A350 in this particular thread is that despite the 90+ posts, one item has been completely overlooked; which aircraft is more readily available for delivery today?

AA is scheduled to receive 787s starting in 2014. US is scheduled to receive A350s starting in 2017.


User currently offlineAA777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 2541 posts, RR: 28
Reply 94, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 9704 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 92):
Conversely, should the 787 encounter more issues that would force further groundings; the A350's later launch could work in its favor. Airbus can apply any design or parts-related lessons learned remedies prior to its launch.

Its more likely that in the next year, all the major 787 kinks will be resolved. Introduction of the A350 is still how many years off.... 3-4 years.... introduction of the 787 still makes more sense in that regard.

AA777


User currently offlineF9animal From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4947 posts, RR: 28
Reply 95, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 9179 times:

Alright. So, it looks like the merger is going to happen. Not excited, but....... Lets talk about what would make me really happy. And I am sure a few would agree! The heritage planes. I would jump for joy if Parker keeps this, and adds more! TWA, Ozark, Reno Air!!! I am sure I am missing a few. But this would be so great to continue, and certainly a welcomed site cor those who once worked for these airlines, and a huge a.nutters spotting/photographers dream.


I Am A Different Animal!!
User currently offlineJarradS From Australia, joined Dec 2012, 12 posts, RR: 0
Reply 96, posted (1 year 2 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 8925 times:

So, Now that AA is becoming a shell for US airways, will there be any future Boeing orders after the current books are completed?

User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7027 posts, RR: 4
Reply 97, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 8637 times:

Quoting jporterfi (Reply 42):
Quoting jporterfi (Reply 42):
. Aren't they more fuel efficient than the ATRs? Having flown on both, I greatly prefer the Q400.

What version of the ATR have you flown with ? You can not compare the older with the newer versions. The latest version of the ATR is more fuel efficient than the Q400, the Q400 therefore is much faster.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlinekiffy From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 176 posts, RR: 0
Reply 98, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 8327 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 78):
The last of the wide bodies from the Northeast to Florida

Not ture, AA543 763, JFK-MIA...


User currently offlineanfromme From Ireland, joined Feb 2012, 395 posts, RR: 11
Reply 99, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 8148 times:

This is from the FAQ on the website AA and US set up for the merger announcement and related topics:

Quote:
The combined airline is planning to take delivery of 607 new aircraft, including 517 narrowbody aircraft and 90 widebody international aircraft,

Source: http://newamericanarriving.com/faq

Just looking at that figure for 90, it seems like they're not intending to cancel any existing orders, as their current widebody orders with A and B are:
Airbus:
8 A330-200 (US)
18 A350-800 (US)
4 A350-900 (US)

Boeing:
5 777-200ER (AA)
12 777-300ER (AA)
42 787 (AA)

That's a total of 89...



Sláinte!
User currently offlinerealsim From Spain, joined Apr 2010, 625 posts, RR: 0
Reply 100, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 7933 times:

Quoting anfromme (Reply 99):

Just looking at that figure for 90, it seems like they're not intending to cancel any existing orders, as their current widebody orders with A and B are:
Airbus:
8 A330-200 (US)
18 A350-800 (US)
4 A350-900 (US)

Boeing:
5 777-200ER (AA)
12 777-300ER (AA)
42 787 (AA)

That's a total of 89...

The 90th one is a 777, because the 90 figure is as of Dec 31, 2012.

Here you have a more detailed list: http://newamericanarriving.com/image...Airways_Side_by_Side_Factsheet.pdf

18 777s
42 787s
08 330s
22 350s

Total = 90.

The combined carrier has 948 mainline aircraft (147 of which widebodies), with 607 orders.

The regional fleet has 563 aircraft, or about 59% of the mainline aircraft. This means that, if the new contract is kept, only 53 more regional aircraft will be allowed (the Republic contract), so unless the scope is changed or a lot of 50 seaters are replaced, AA won't be able to get many additional large RJ's, which are needed for expansion in almost all the hubs.

Just to compare, Delta Connection operates 551 aircraft with a fleet of 719 aircraft, so the rate is 77%.


User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7027 posts, RR: 4
Reply 101, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7485 times:

Is there a possibility that the last 5 777-200ERs on order can be converted to 777Ws ?


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29690 posts, RR: 84
Reply 102, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7609 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting columba (Reply 101):
Is there a possibility that the last 5 777-200ERs on order can be converted to 777Ws?

I would say that is a foregone conclusion that if they are delivered, it will be as 777-300ERs.  


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 8773 posts, RR: 29
Reply 103, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7635 times:

According the 777 production list at least 2 777-200ERs for AA will not be built:

cn 32439 / N764AN
cn 31480 / N763AN



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinerealsim From Spain, joined Apr 2010, 625 posts, RR: 0
Reply 104, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 7523 times:

Quoting columba (Reply 101):
Is there a possibility that the last 5 777-200ERs on order can be converted to 777Ws ?

It has been reported that all have been converted to 77Ws, so AA will have a total of 20 aircraft of the type. However, it seems that the official agreement with Boeing has not been reached yet, but it should be reflected on Boeing's website soon.


User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3150 posts, RR: 5
Reply 105, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7318 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 8):

EJet/CR7: EJets will be prioritized first and foremost to more competitive markets where a better product is required (e.g., ORD and NYC, then WAS and PHL) while CR7s will be flowed into other hubs where AA is more dominant (DFW, MIA, CLT, LAX)

Dash 8: The US Express fleet of Dash 8s are quite old, and will need replacement at some point, and many of Eagle’s shorter routes out of multiple hubs (including DFW, ORD and MIA) would also be a good fit for a prop; I could see AMR/regionals placing a substantial order for Q400s or ATR72s to fill this role

A few things. Eagle just retired their AT72s recently, do you think they would order them again?

What about the large fleet of CRJ-200s flown by Air Wisconsin and I think Mesa (I might be outdated here)? Another company just started flying CRJ-200s for American out of DFW.

There are also a handful of CRJ-9s

I guess the question here is do some of the regional carriers lose contracts or fade away kind of like Pinnacle, Mesaba, Comair etc after NW/DL merger.


User currently onlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4091 posts, RR: 5
Reply 106, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7114 times:

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 43):
The A350-900 is just a better-conceived aircraft. If the merger goes through I feel absolutely confident that any A350s actually delivered to the merged airline will be either A350-900s or A350-1000s.

Does anyone know the lease terms on the new 77Ws? In my mind, it's a perfectly likely scenario that all of the A350 orders could be convered to -1000 and kicked down the road a few years. I certainly agree that there will not be any -800s delivered, but I don't agree that they will be outright cancelled just because of the 77Ws. If they pushed back delivery until 2025, the A350 could still work as a replacement.


User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5283 posts, RR: 29
Reply 107, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 7027 times:

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 106):

Does anyone know the lease terms on the new 77Ws? In my mind, it's a perfectly likely scenario that all of the A350 orders could be convered to -1000 and kicked down the road a few years. I certainly agree that there will not be any -800s delivered, but I don't agree that they will be outright cancelled just because of the 77Ws. If they pushed back delivery until 2025, the A350 could still work as a replacement.

I don't know if 2025 makes sense, but certainly there is a case to be made for pushing them out a few years and perhaps swapping them for the -1000. DL pushed out the 787 for the better part of a decade - no reason it couldn't happen here. I'm not advocating it, though. The more variety, the better. I just think in this case they are looking at 20 new-build 77W's, 42 incoming 787's, and some newer build A330's - that's almost 80 new/newer widebodies. They could probably hold off a little while on the A350 and be fine.

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6965 times:

Is there any chance they keep the US paint? I hate the new AA planes personally

User currently offlineDLD9S From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 256 posts, RR: 0
Reply 109, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6933 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 108):

Is there any chance they keep the US paint? I hate the new AA planes personally

No.

Quoting JarradS (Reply 96):
So, Now that AA is becoming a shell for US airways, will there be any future Boeing orders after the current books are completed?

How is AA a shell for US? This is a merger, not an acquisition... Regardless, AA is bringing more money in the bank, more employees, the HQ, the name, the brand, the frequent flyer program, etc... I would be willing to bet that even the SOC will be AA's, and the Cactus call sign will be retired.



717 727 737 747 757 767 777 DC9 DC10 M80 M90 M11 L10 AB6 333 340 319 320 321 ARJ CRJ EM2 EMJ SF3 146 100 BE1...
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29690 posts, RR: 84
Reply 110, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 6819 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FriendlySkies (Reply 106):
Does anyone know the lease terms on the new 77Ws?

I believe they are direct purchases from Boeing and I can't find any information about them being sold and leased-back.


User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 111, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 6633 times:

I thought more about this - according to their orderbook, by 2019 they will have 546 Airbus narrowbodies and possibly 406 737s.

That's just not going to happen.

NS

[Edited 2013-02-14 18:17:13]

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29690 posts, RR: 84
Reply 112, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6531 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting gigneil (Reply 111):
I thought more about this - according to their orderbook, by 2019 they will have 546 Airbus narrowbodies and possibly 406 737s.

That's just not going to happen.

US Air's A319-100s and A320-200s will be pushing the two-decade mark by then, so I could see them all being retired as AA's new aircraft arrive. That would reduce the Airbus fleet by over 150 airframes. The US 737-300s and 757-200s should also be gone by then, so that is another 50+ Boeing's gone plus the 200 MD birds. AA's A320 classics are on lease, so they won't be permanent additions to the fleet.

[Edited 2013-02-14 19:33:59]

User currently offlineBDL757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 145 posts, RR: 0
Reply 113, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6432 times:

Does anyone think the new AA will order the 739/739MAX? I'm guessing since they've ordered the A321 they don't need the 739.

User currently offlineJarradS From Australia, joined Dec 2012, 12 posts, RR: 0
Reply 114, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6386 times:

Once the current Boeing orders are delivered, and the next round of fleet renewals/additions are needed, what are the chances that AA will order more Boeings, or will the new AA still have the US airbus Bias?

User currently offlinegigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16345 posts, RR: 86
Reply 115, posted (1 year 2 months 5 days ago) and read 6263 times:

Stitch - my numbers excluded all those other frames. But I didn't think about the current A320s being that old then.

Quoting BDL757 (Reply 113):
Does anyone think the new AA will order the 739/739MAX? I'm guessing since they've ordered the A321 they don't need the 739.

They will have a LOT of A321s

NS


User currently offlinecolumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7027 posts, RR: 4
Reply 116, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6198 times:

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 105):
A few things. Eagle just retired their AT72s recently, do you think they would order them again?

The new ATR-72 is a very capable plane and very fuel efficient, but I don´t know if Eagle is in the market for new planes right now as they just ordered EJets



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5283 posts, RR: 29
Reply 117, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6130 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 115):
They will have a LOT of A321s

With all of the A321's at US, I've wondered how soon they would order the NEO's (which seemed to be a foregone conclusion given their fleet) when the best example for them would be yet more A321's. For an airline the size of US, that seemed like a lot of "757's". With AA also ordering them, that will be one huge A321 fleet.

-Dave



Totes my goats!
User currently offlinecarpethead From Japan, joined Aug 2004, 2910 posts, RR: 3
Reply 118, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5855 times:

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 92):
one item has been completely overlooked; which aircraft is more readily available for delivery today?

The A332 and 77W. In production with no electrical problems nor production/testing delays.
Surprisingly, no one has brought up the subject of these aircraft. Will more of these aircraft be ordered?


User currently offlinePhilly65 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 57 posts, RR: 0
Reply 119, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 5558 times:

I know this will cause a few Boeing fans to get a wad in their panties, but I don't envision a preference to one OEM versus the other. Given the sheer size of the fieet the combined carrier will order a stream of aircraft based on availability and price. They, like Delta, will base purchasing decisions on those two criteria for the most part. Remember 99.99% of flying public could give a rip which aircraft type they are flying one.

User currently offlinerotating14 From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 543 posts, RR: 0
Reply 120, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5393 times:

Quoting carpethead (Reply 118):
Will more of these aircraft be ordered?

I guess it would depend on the missions AA would want to serve with them. Since the 77W is a longer range aircraft, if AA should order more I would guess they would stick them on Asian routes out of DFW or LAX, hell even MIA (MIA-NRT) and maybe a couple more on the GRU route. Since US management (loyal Airbus client) is now at the helm, one could say they would order more A330's but they have 350's coming.


User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2048 posts, RR: 1
Reply 121, posted (1 year 2 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5368 times:

Quoting carpethead (Reply 118):
Will more of these aircraft be ordered?

I can see them ordering more 77Ws, since they have nothing else in that size range. But between all the A330s US already has, the A330s/A358/A359s US have on order, the 763s and 772s AA have, and the 787s that AA has on order, I really don't see them making a major purchase for additional A330s.


User currently offlineyyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 122, posted (1 year 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4601 times:

Quoting gigneil (Reply 111):
I thought more about this - according to their orderbook, by 2019 they will have 546 Airbus narrowbodies and possibly 406 737s.

That's just not going to happen.

The 406x 737 is based on the current 306x 738 ordered (200 in service now, 106 on order) which all will be delivered by 2018. The MAX-8 will begin deliveries in 2017 but will most likely not be all be delivered by 2019. So I agree 406 in service will not happen.

The A32x total is messier. 276 in service/on order by US now, 131 non-neo and 130 planned neo by AA totals 537, less any retirees (15 of the US A320's were built 1990 or earlier and hence are older than many of the AA 752s and M80s). Again, its unlikely all 130 planned neo's will be delivered by 2019.

Incidently, AA will now take the A319 sharklet test aircraft in 2013 (built in 2012). Current order split 16x A319 and 115x A321.

Quoting BDL757 (Reply 113):
Does anyone think the new AA will order the 739/739MAX? I'm guessing since they've ordered the A321 they don't need the 739.

739ER no, 9 MAX....maybe (given that it will likely be in production until 2030). The new AA fleet will be so huge, their next tranche of orders in years to come could be add'l MAX or add'l neo's. or both.



Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
User currently offlinecrj900lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 281 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3924 times:

Quoting NASCARAirforce (Reply 105):
What about the large fleet of CRJ-200s flown by Air Wisconsin and I think Mesa (I might be outdated here)? Another company just started flying CRJ-200s for American out of DFW.There are also a handful of CRJ-9s

Air Wisconsin as they are now (71 aircraft, all CRJ-200's) are gone as of 2015 and maybe sooner so those 71 CRJ-200's won't be in the fleet. The only way they might stay with the new American would be in a much smaller role with the CRJ-200's (15-20 aircraft maybe for routes that can support them) and at a much cheaper cost or by upgrading their fleet to something like the 700 or 900. But that is a long shot.


Mesa has 38 CRJ-900's flying for US, no CRJ-200's. I believe the contract is up in 2014 but those aircraft fill a niche for US and will do the same for AA in the regional system. Once again there are operational issues with Mesa but they are also a cheap operation for US so you have to take the good with the bad. Do I think they stick with the new AA? Probably.

SkyWest also currently flys for US and will transition over to the new AA and continue the flying with a mixture of their aircraft.


User currently offlineLHCVG From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1449 posts, RR: 1
Reply 124, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3804 times:

Quoting Philly65 (Reply 119):
I know this will cause a few Boeing fans to get a wad in their panties, but I don't envision a preference to one OEM versus the other. Given the sheer size of the fieet the combined carrier will order a stream of aircraft based on availability and price. They, like Delta, will base purchasing decisions on those two criteria for the most part. Remember 99.99% of flying public could give a rip which aircraft type they are flying one.

And once you have both brands on-property, it makes it that much easier since it removes the last major stumbling block (adding a new type from a manufacturer you have few if any from currently). From my POV the advent of the three American megacarriers over the last few years is a win for both A and B - now each of them has an intregrated A and B fleet where each has a foot in the door and room to play ping pong against the other (A got the major coup in the AA order even if B couldn't have fulfilled all of that itself, B locked up a UA order for just 737s, 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...
Impact On BA If AA/US Merger posted Tue Sep 4 2012 16:11:45 by yaariseattle
WFAA: AA-US Merger Announced Next Week (sources) posted Wed Feb 6 2013 15:39:34 by blueflyer
Fate Of Domestic IFE In An AA/US Merger posted Wed Jan 2 2013 08:43:39 by 1337Delta764
AA/Us Merger - Two Airlines, One Parent? posted Fri Dec 28 2012 20:37:16 by cloudboy
More AA/US Merger News posted Fri Aug 24 2012 11:47:14 by mattya9
AA/US Merger Effects On DCA? posted Tue Jul 3 2012 14:18:14 by SWALUV
AA/US Merger=Fare Hikes + US Future? posted Mon Apr 23 2012 11:47:36 by SWALUV
Shocked By AA Union Support For AA/US Merger posted Sat Apr 21 2012 18:15:43 by kakk80
Official DL/US Merger Thread: Fleet Speculation posted Mon Nov 20 2006 06:43:28 by Diamond
AA/US Impact On JFK posted Thu Feb 7 2013 07:29:40 by questions