Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Continental Reschedules Delivery Of Boeing Jets  
User currently offlineLt-AWACS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1611 times:

Some news From Monday's Houston Biz Journal
http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/2002/02/11/daily7.html


Continental reschedules delivery of Boeing jets

Continental Airlines said on Monday that it would defer delivery of 28 of 48 Boeing Co. aircraft that it was scheduled to receive in 2002, finalizing a previously announced rescheduling of orders.


The Houston-based airline has received seven of 20 planned aircraft deliveries so far this year. Continental plans to take two 777-200ERs, 10 767-400ERs, two 757-300s, two 737-900s and four 737-800s in 2002.



The 28 deferred aircraft, along with Continental's other 39 outstanding orders, are to be delivered from late 2003 through mid-2008, the carrier said.



Continental has a fleet of 356 jets and Continental Express has 142 regional jets and 33 turboprops.

Copyright 2002 American City Business Journals Inc


24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineHkgspotter1 From Hong Kong, joined Nov 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1469 times:

Well most of that does not effect me but I will see the 772's.

User currently offlineUsairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3402 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1463 times:

why so many 764's

User currently offlineContinental From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5516 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1459 times:

WOW! 2008? Maybe I'll pilot one of those new planes!

Continental


User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4531 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1418 times:

Continental has always had a widebody shortage, and the rapid retirement of the DC-10's didn't make things any better. The 764 was ordered to replace all of the DC-10's, mainly to Europe and Hawaii, and even in the Micronesia division.

User currently offlineIahcsr From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 3424 posts, RR: 42
Reply 5, posted (12 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1387 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hmmm.... Let's see.... By my count that will make for a total of 18 777s, 16 764s (plus 10 762s) 4 753s, 12 739s and 77 738s.


Working very hard to Fly Right....
User currently offlineAirzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1333 times:

CBA,

You may believe that CO has a widebody shortage, but Gordon thinks directly the opposite. Actually, what that statement doesn't tell you is that they are parking 2 777 (maybe the first ones they got since they won't have to do their first heavy checks).

Unlike their idiot friends at United with way too many widebodies, they have a tremendous amount of flexibility to switch out 735, 73G, 738, or even 739's based on demand. They don't have many widebodies flying domestically since unlike United who by flying 777's from SFO to DEN has to basically trash the price to fill the plane, CO can comfortably fill the plane and maximize their opportunity. They are still flying with the highest RPM of any airline in the business.



User currently offlineContinentalEWR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3762 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1264 times:

Yes its true...Continental probably has the most flexible fleet of the major world airlines. The 737, 757, and 767 fleets permit the airline to adjust schedules to maximize revenue and loads on key flights.

I would bet that Ships 001 and 002 of the 777 fleet will be the first to be parked for a short duration because they are approaching their first major maintenance check (they were delivered in October 1998). However, Ships 15 and 16 are the only two leased 777's in the fleet so perhaps these will go back to their lessors. Not really sure.

I wonder where all those extra 767-400's will fly to. I suppose they'll start showing up on some domestic and transcon routes.

ContinentalEWR


User currently offlinePadcrasher From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1253 times:

Will CO retire any aircraft over the next few years?

User currently offlineIahcsr From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 3424 posts, RR: 42
Reply 9, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1228 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This bit about parking two 777s keeps showing up but I have yet to see anything from any offiicial source about it. (and by official I mean a CO press release, or an industy publication of some sort).


Working very hard to Fly Right....
User currently offlineAirzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1198 times:

Iahcsr,

Let's just say that I had a little chat with Gordon on a flight once.

He also said some interesting things about their partners NW, and some interesting perspective on WN. Not good on either.


User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 11, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1191 times:

I can 2nd the parking of the two 777's, I have heard this from numerous inside people, although not from Gordon

Jer


User currently offlineIahcsr From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 3424 posts, RR: 42
Reply 12, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1186 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hmmm..... knowing how GB talks, I can imagine just how interesting such a talk must have been. He can be ...... colorful .... in his choice of wording.


Working very hard to Fly Right....
User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 13, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1180 times:

Colorful is one way of putting it.... I am still waiting for him to slip up on the Friday message...

Ermm hmm, grunt... This is Gordomn and it's Friday, February 15th... we've had a #$%&*ng great week here at Continental... you guys are #$%#^%, I'll be in that $%#^hole called Cleveland next week for a CEO exchange etc...grunt grunt...... This week we have had 6 100% completion days.... grunt..cough.... #$%^ing excellent work, well done you all...

that's all for this week, I talk you ya friday


User currently offlineRhino4ever From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 146 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1153 times:

Obviously Gordon likes to put down his partner at NWA and minimize his companies exposure to the alliance. Because he fears having to pay his pilots/employees NWA wages, benifits and retirement which would turn CAL unprofitable. It is in his interest to keep his outfit distanced from NWA. Had NWA not invested the $450 mil. in CAL and brought them into the alliance, they were looking at CH-11 again or a DAL buyout which would have seen most of CAL disappear with the employees. Buying back the NWA stock (NWA retained veto power on CAL sale) helped him keep his group distanced from the NWA pay/benifits issue. He has done some good things to revamp the operation and keep them afloat ( CH-11 not one of them ) He also got caught short on cash by spending everything he had. He was the first to stand up and beg the government for help. Actual cash is low when you don't count line of credit loans available, or tapped into already, and a fleet that is mostly leased. He does a good job of making his employees believe in themselves and their knew look which they all can be proud of. Again, it would have been hard for an airline not to have made tons of cash during this period. THe alliance with NWA/KLM should continue to flourish. The best aligned and integrated one is NWA/KLM. A much better way to grow an airline vs. the cost of a individual growth or rapid expenditure of cash on new airplanes that you can't afford ( UAL !!! ) He should be climbing on board with it instead of turning his shoulder to it. Then they will be able to have a history of profitability, safety, standardization, and competence that NWA has had for 76 years now...

User currently offlineAirzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1141 times:

Generally, I try not to get caught up in too much conjecture about the goings-on of one airline or the next, since it is all speculation in the end. But on the issue of Northwest, I think it is worth a bit of clarification.

The talk surrounding NW wasn’t about whether CO needed NW or not, frankly I think CO likes the position they are in vis a vis their alliance with NW and KL (even though the NW product just does not stack up to CO on long haul—but I digress).

NW has problems of a different sort which is attributed to them and not attributed to their decisions. First we all admit they have old airplanes. Some believe the DC-9 strategy was a great success others do not. I tend to agree the former. The DC-9’s have taken some weight penalties in order for them to get their engines upgraded, therefore they don’t have the range they used to and doesn’t allow for quick changes to schedules and capacity shifting. CO can send a 73G or even a 733 instead of a 738 on a transcon flight without crew problems or flight penalties since the fleet is very flexible. DC-9’s can’t make it to the West Coast, or even much past the halfway mark. NW’s only choice is to fly A320’s of bigger. That entails crew swaps, catering issues. In addition they are not Stage IV compliant, and my understanding is they can’t be. Therefore NW has to buy new airplanes. They have no choice, so the DC-9 program only delayed the inevitable.

Now the hard part, NW can’t afford to buy new planes. Not based on reasons generally expressed here about cash positions etc., the banks won’t lend them money at favorable interest rates. The reason for this is the tenuous position airlines are in at the moment financially (too much risk), also if God forbid there was another terrorist attack, the risk of losing the plane becomes a bit higher, also reflected in a higher interest rates. The rates are so high at the moment, NW can’t get anyone to lend them money to finance new aircraft purchases. Hence the double end of the sword; they have to buy new planes, but can’t.

That is NW’s biggest problem at the moment.

Also on the ownership vs. lease arguments, it is a lot easier to flush out your capacity when you can hand back planes to lenders rather than parking brand new planes in the desert that you still have to pay for since the used plane market is crap. Trust me, nobody is going to want those DC-9s after Stage IV is passed. Point is mute.



User currently offlineCALpilot From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 998 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1133 times:

Our latest pilot bid reduced the B777 crews by 27 people. I would suspect that would indicate that 2 triple 7's are leaving.

The B767-400 are going to stay in the Pacific, and begain doing more of the North Atlintic.

We have also stoped at 4, of the B757-300's.


User currently offlineRhino4ever From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 146 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1113 times:

NWA had financed all deliveries of aircraft for 2002/03before 9-11.Other carriers are deferring many deliveries because of the high interest now. NWA is getting 38 this year and 40 next year. A-320 family of 48, 757 family of 22 and a few 747-400. will give them a A-320 fleet of 155 and a 757 fleet of 76. 231 aircraft for flying to the coasts. DC-9 segments average a .5 to 1.5. Range not an issue with that fleet. For their unique route system the DC-9's are valuable and at the time the modification program was very smart move. Nothing worth buying for the cost in the short run. For the few planes they have parked (paid for) better than the airlines taking delivery of new ones and parking them at $300,000 a month. They halted the furloughs at about half the original projection and looking at recalls being scheduled soon. We both make valid points and hope things continue to recover and no more incidents send the industry downward. Pray for UAL...

User currently offlineAirzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1205 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1099 times:

Rhino,

I agree, for the short term they should be alright with their current financing, it is beyond 2003 when things get interesting.

What do you think about Stage IV? I've heard that it may pass and others that think differently. I agree the range issue for DC-9's is not too much an issue when flying from MSP to ORD, it just limits some flexibility for other segments.

I guess the real key is Stage IV, if that goes through the DC-9 program could have been a rather costly mistake (assuming the interest rates don't change in the forseeable). But they will need to buy planes now in order to take delivery in 2-5 years. A bit of a risky proposition.



User currently offlineAfitch7881 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1091 times:

$300,000 a month? I hope you mean thats what they are losing not using these planes because you can park planes for as cheap as 400-$1000 at Mohave.


Eric



User currently offlineStormin From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 60 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1082 times:

Afitch,
$300,000 a month in financing charges of a new plane versus $0 charges for a paid-for DC9 is what Rhino was driving at. It is much cheaper to park planes you don't owe any money on than to park the ones you are still paying for.

Later


User currently offlineEWR757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 360 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1056 times:



We are not "parking" 2 777's. There is an overall block hour reduction due to the first airplanes coming up for scheduled heavy checks. These total block hours is equivalent (over a year period) to the removal of 2 airframes, spread out through the fleet.

No "airframes" are being taken out of service.


User currently offlineRhino4ever From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 146 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1041 times:

Haven't read anything lately on stage IV. With the industry hurting as it is, wouldn't be surprised if it was delayed as the added cost to everyone isn't needed right now.

User currently offlineIahcsr From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 3424 posts, RR: 42
Reply 23, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1032 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thank You EWR757. I thought it might be something like that with the 777s.


Working very hard to Fly Right....
User currently offlineEWR757 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 360 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (12 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1020 times:



You're welcome.



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...
MAS Taking Delivery Of Boeing 777-300ER? posted Wed May 8 2002 00:14:30 by OdiE
Continental To Take Delivery Of Additional Boeing posted Thu Mar 31 2005 17:52:35 by STT757
BW: Is Boeing Bailing Out Of Passenger Jets? posted Thu Apr 10 2003 10:08:01 by Ktliem@yvr
Diagram Of A Thrust Reverser For Big Boeing Jets posted Thu Jan 3 2002 04:34:31 by RC Pilot
Boeing Takes Delivery Of A340's posted Thu Oct 26 2000 06:03:30 by MCOtoATL
Boeing Halts Delivery Of 4 Models posted Tue Nov 2 1999 20:56:06 by Mt99
SIA Take Delivery Of 2 777-300er's Tuesday 11-28 posted Sat Nov 25 2006 12:48:45 by UAL747-600
Photo Of Boeing 787 Section Being Transported posted Sat Oct 28 2006 16:09:01 by RobK
Singapore Airlines Takes Delivery Of B747-400BCF posted Thu Oct 26 2006 18:46:47 by Singapore_Air
SQ Takes Delivery Of A380 ....(Lego) posted Wed Sep 6 2006 09:52:33 by SFORunner