Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A330-200´s For BA, UAL Would Not Be Unlogical IMO  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2390 times:

Looking at e.g. UAL and BA long haul fleets (made up of "new" B747´s and B777´s and lots of old 767´s) it would not surprice me if they would require a 250-300 seater to keep open/ open up routes were the 777 is just to big.

With it´s capasity and 10.000 km range the A330/200 could (apart from replacing the 767) give more flexibility on the longer routes.

Both already commited to large airbus narrow body fleets and the boeing 767-300/400ER just doesn´t offer the efficiency and range.

IMO these 767´s are more an older medium range aircraft type with extra fuel/range & updated interiors.

It would be in line with its competitors KLM and NWA ..

cheers
keesje

41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineUal777contrail From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 2202 times:

no way would ual ever buy teh a330's



not gonna happen


User currently offlineContinentalFan From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 356 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2177 times:

Keesje,

Even though UAL has a large Airbus narrowbody fleet (and I see it going all Airbus in the long term), in the US airlines have all sorts of clauses in the contracts with the pilots that make cockpit commonality not very useful (e.g. if I was a UAL A320 pilot, I couldn't just hop into a hypothetical UAL A330 if they needed a pilot, because of seniority rules, etc.). Anyways, UAL seems committed to Boeing for its widebody fleet (and I don't think that Boeing would let UAL slip away).

Mike


User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 3, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2167 times:

Unlikely.

UA is highly committed to the 777 and has a huge fleet of 777 and 763 aircraft that suits its needs. Both types are quite new......why do they need another type? The A332 is a great aircraft, but what would UA do with it?

Same for BA - their long-haul future is with also with the 777 and, with LHR being as cogested as it is, does not really need or want a smaller long-haul airliner. Look how they utilize their 763s - mostly on European services and many now leased out or on the ground, the 763 is not a type that requires replacement. BA did look at the A333 for high-density services serveral times but passed.

Dont forget how expensive it is for an airline to introduce a new type.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2143 times:

I think A330 is very different from 777 as well as 767 in terms of capasity & range.

However in a few years the 767 design is 30 years old without radical improvements. Buying more is perhaps not feasible. I think with the continued growth in the next ten years by-passing hubs for mid size destinations will grow for instance on the Atlantic.

Many of those new city pairs won´t be ready for a 777 from the start.

Many airlines have been publicly serious commited to a brand until they found out to have no choice & switched..


User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4537 posts, RR: 41
Reply 5, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 2119 times:

Keesje - and in those same few years time (actually, it is more than a few), the A330 design will be twenty years old...

V/F



"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlineThe777Man From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 6505 posts, RR: 55
Reply 6, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 2073 times:

Agree with DutchJet, UA doesn't have a need for them and uneconomical to introduce a new fleet type. Probably, UA will replace 767s eventually with a 767NG but that's a long way off. First 762 was put into service 1982 or so, aobut 20 years old. Also seating capacity on UA's 777s is about 260 seats on the ones they fly transatlantic most (non-ER, three class). The777Man


Need a Boeing 777 Firing Order....Further to fly....CI, MU, LX and LH 777s
User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 2070 times:

Keesje,

There is no way United would order the A330.

First off, the 767s are not old airplanes. The first one flew in 1982, making it 20 years old. Most of United's 767s haven't even reached their midlife yet. The 767 is a very modern and efficient aircraft, so quit with the "old" stuff.

I don't see a reason at all to order the A330 when you have a large fleet of 767s, 777s, and 747s.

Makes no sense.


User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 2036 times:

I can see BA going for the A330-200 with RR Trent 772s to replace their 767-300s.

User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (12 years 4 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 2029 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I can see BA buying RR trent powered A330-200's aswell, but the only problem might be that the A330 might be a "too big airplane" for short haul euro routes. Then again, stranger things have happened in aviation.

Arsenal@LHR



In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1970 times:

United's newest 767 N677UA was delived in November. The -300s are not old by any means. They will be around for quite some time. The -200s have an uncertain future.

I L U V 7 6 7


User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1960 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

What will UA replace the 762's with? Maybe the new updated 762's?

Arsenal@LHR



In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineUps763 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1954 times:

The Boeing 767, though a bit slower than the A330, is a great airplane. It has to the ability to fly various routes from short-medium-long range and though some of the -200s are approaching their 20th birthday, the -300s are quite young and efficency is not a question. The 763 will continue to be the backdone of several major routes.



User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 57
Reply 13, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1954 times:

Concerning the 762s, I would guess that they will not be directly replaced. It is more likely that as UA takes more 777s, the 777 will replace the 763 on some routes (especially transatlantic services) and the 763s, in turn, will take over the routes currently flown by the 762 (which are mainly US transcontinental). Then, the 762s will be retired.

UA wants and needs widebody service on its US transcon routes in order to offer 3 classes of service and to keep its full-fare, thus very important, business travellers happy; thus, the 752, 753 or A32X is really not an option, especially out of JFK.

UA is very happy with its 777s and its 763s are quite young.....I dont see UA introducing another type, be it the A332 or B764, in the forseeable future.





User currently offlineAirworthy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1937 times:

I flew on N601UA, UA's oldest aircraft (a 767-200) on Tuesday. Both the pilot's and flight crew promoted the aircraft on being in very good condition despite its age. In spite of the old "crappy" seats, I felt that the fact that this clean and well-kept plane was UAL's oldest was very comforting and impressive.


UNlogical?

ME fail english?! That's unpossible!!


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7993 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1892 times:

Why on Earth would UA want to buy the A330-200?  Insane

Anyway, the 767-200/300 fleet flying with UA is still in very good condition and the planes do meet today's ICAO Stage III noise standards and with a few changes meet even the Stage IV noise standards due in 2006.

I expect UA to look at a major interior upgrade program for their 767 fleet fairly soon and we might even see an engine upgrade program further down the road, which will allow UA to keep flying the 767 until at least 2016.


User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1854 times:

RayChuang wrote:
I expect UA to look at a major interior upgrade program for their 767 fleet fairly soon and we might even see an engine upgrade program further down the road, which will allow UA to keep flying the 767 until at least 2016.

The 767-300 has already gone through an interior upgrade about 3 years ago. The 767-300ER was the first to feature the new seats in all cabins, as well as the standard PTV system for widebody international planes. The only thing left to do with that plane is to put the new carpets, bulkheads, and seat covers in. That is happening as the planes leave HMV.

Regarding the 767-200. United was planning on updating the interiors on them starting a year ago. Due to a finachial crisis, the project has been placed on hiatus. United is looking at other options with the 767-200 which include selling them off. United is not very fond of the JT9D engine, and the 767-200 is not scoring browine points with our clients. While they do have a low cycle life, they are the oldest planes in the fleet, and are on their way out.

Aresnal@LHR wrote:

What will UA replace the 762's with? Maybe the new updated 762's?

Probably 767-300s and 777s on the premium transcons. United has the 777s to spare. It doesnt make that much sence to have 777 turns 5 times a day from SFO to DEN. Those planes could be better utilized on the JFK-SFO/LAX runs. The 767-200 only flies on transcons, and the 767-300 and the 777 could replace it quite easily.

I L U V 7 6 7


User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 1841 times:

People in forum are asking why would UA go for the A330? Look at US Airways, they have 767-200ERs and instead of going for some new larger capacity 767-300s or 400s, they went for the Airbus A330-300 because they already operate Airbus A319/A320/A321 aircraft. Why can't UA purchase the A330-200/300 if they want to if they also operate the A319 & A320.

User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 1834 times:

Someone has stated that UA is not very fond of the P&W JT9D on their 767-200s. Why can't UA re-engine them with PW4000 series engines like their 767-300s & 747-400s have?

User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 1831 times:

People in forum are asking why would UA go for the A330? Look at US Airways, they have 767-200ERs and instead of going for some new larger capacity 767-300s or 400s, they went for the Airbus A330-300 because they already operate Airbus A319/A320/A321 aircraft. Why can't UA purchase the A330-200/300 if they want to if they also operate the A319 & A320.

US Airways only had the Airbus narrow-aircraft, and a few 767s. United will not order the A330, because they have a large fleet of 767s, 777s, and 747s, US Airways didn't.

United's future fleet will probably be something like this:

737 (?)
A319
A320
744
757
767
777

When you have a large fleet of 767s, 777s, and 747s, you don't go ordering an A330, it makes no sense at all.





User currently offlineAirworthy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 1827 times:

The only problem with placing 767-300s and 777-200s flying on JFK-SFO/LAX runs is that the 767-200s are right-sized for this market. Whie the 763 has the same amount of premium seating as the 762, with much better cabin amenities, as it stands right now UA is achieving fairly low load factors on SFO/LAX-JFK.

The 2 morning flights from SFO-JFK on 767-300s consistently go out underutlized, with F not even being filled with space available non-revs!!!

UA may have 777s to spare. But you have to ask yourself whether it is better to fly the Denver turns full or fly the premium transcons even emptier. UA is showing less and less commitment to JFK anyway.

Finding a suitable (non-money losing) replacement for the 767-200s will be difficult because the smaller 762s are right-sized for the market. If indeed UA does replace them with larger gauge 763s and "mammoth for the route" 777s, you can bet frequencies would be reduced. But I just don't see that happening because that's why last minute premium travellers choose United--the frequencies.


User currently offlineKFRG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (12 years 4 months 6 days ago) and read 1821 times:

"People in forum are asking why would UA go for the A330? Look at US Airways, they have 767-200ERs and instead of going for some new larger capacity 767-300s or 400s, they went for the Airbus A330-300 because they already operate Airbus A319/A320/A321 aircraft. Why can't UA purchase the A330-200/300 if they want to if they also operate the A319 & A320."

First of all, why would you even compare UA and US? They are two very different airlines. US had a small fleet of (Mostly) ex.Piedmont B762's, and after the US/Boeing relations breakup because of the canceled Boeing order, I don't think they would have gone for another Boeing product. UA on the otherhand operates a large fleet of Boeing products (B757/767/747/777). Obviously you have not understood a single post in this whole thread.

Your second question:

"Someone has stated that UA is not very fond of the P&W JT9D on their 767-200s. Why can't UA re-engine them with PW4000 series engines like their 767-300s & 747-400s have?"

This could be possible, but I highly doubt UA has the greens to spend on a B762 re-engine program. Also, many airlines (mabye UA too?) have outgrown the B762, and find the B763 as a better fit. Today the B762 has become more of a "niche" aircraft.

-Tom



User currently offlineILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3141 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (12 years 4 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1798 times:

Hass (Airworthy/SFOintern),

While the 767-200s may be the right size for the market, so are the -300s. The 767-200 has the same number of premium seats as the -300. The -300 has more economy seats, but has a lower operating cost.

The New York market is getting saturated with lower yields brought on by jetBlue. jetBlue is taking passenger away from United, American, and Delta on this market. As a result, the business travelers still will stay with the majors but the majors can not compete...or can they?

Lets say United dropped the 767-200 on the JFK market. Now lets say that the 777 came in during the peak hours of atleast one early morning flight, one mid morning flight, and one redeye. You can not deny that those fill up in the premium cabin. I've seen the loads. Especially the 11am flight, which is carrying Asia connections. The other flights, in the afternoon at weird hours could actually be downgraded to an Airbus aircraft, where the Y class is what is filling the plane, not First/Business. It would allow for an interesting mix of aircraft on the route, allow for the same number of people to be moved between the cities, reduce your costs by operating cheaper costs, and it would also allow you to gain back some of the customers that United has been loosing to jetBlue on the New York flight.

American is already planning something very similiar, except with the use of 757s and 738s out of JFK to jetBlue cities. American is still running their widebodies into premium markets, and I think that they should keep this up. However, they are going after jetBlue. United, at the moment is not. The way to go after them is to put airbusses on the new york flighs to capture the lower yielding traffic. The high yielding traffic would remain on widebodies.

Before you jump over me for the idea, remember that this is something that has yet to be attempted by UA or any major really. Examine the possiblilties first, and ponder what I've said.

Flame Away
I L U V 7 6 7


User currently offlineUal777contrail From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (12 years 4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1786 times:

no way would united ever order the a330's

it makes no sense, it would also cost united more money they cant spend right now.when you operate the most 777's in the world you dont need an a330, what a step down.





ual 777 contrail


User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (12 years 4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1774 times:

Well, I just flew SFO - JFK on UA #4 on tail 609 and it was an uneventful, but PACKED red eye. This was on a Friday, mind you.

Two of the flight attendants recognized me and we talked in the rear galley for most of the trip (there was a screaming kid sitting in front of me, so forget sleep). They said the loads have been very high lately, at least on all of their trips, with F being mainly all revenue passengers and business packed w/ revenue and upgrades from coach.

Someone stated earlier the 767 is an "OLD" design... and it's been "out grown". Did you know the 737 airframe is almost 40? Why change something if it works. The 767 has one of the best wings around (carried down to the 757 w/ mods made) and is a solid performer. So the engines aren't the best... it's still a better choice than bringing in useless Airbi A330s. I've flown tons and tons and tons of miles on United, and you really couldn't tell that #609 was about 18 years old... the seats were the standard pre Deco 5.5 seats, didn't have individual air vents, and had the basic video screen @ the front of the cabin. The only way you knew it was old was by looking at the Business Class seats... that's bout it.

United is presently looking at getting more 757s, 767-300s, and 777-300s for those of you wondering. United will probably place the order this summer as a way to keep ALPA permitting the scope clause violation to continue.


25 RayChuang : ILUV767, I think with new interiors and replacing the original JT9D's with newer PW4000's, UA's 767-200 fleet could just keep chugging along for anoth
26 A388 : Keesje, I agree with you that the 777 cannot be compared with the A330 but I can't agree with you that the 767 is not in the same category as the A330
27 KFRG : "EVA Air ordered the A330 for their 767 replacements, Asiana ordered the A330 for their 767 replacement programme, US Airways ordered the A330 for the
28 Yyz717 : The US 333's are used for growth of the 762 routes, not for replacement.
29 ILUV767 : Ray, I do not think that putting PW4000s in on the 762 is worth it if the airframe is 18 years old. True, while they have a very low cycle life, mecha
30 KFRG : "Also, by putting PW4000s in on the 762, it would be "overkill" on that type of plane. It could actually shorten your life on the plane." Actually, B7
31 SFOintern : The 767-300 has lower costs per seat mile (CASMs), however *overall* operating costs cannot be lower than the 767-200. The -300 is heavier and larger
32 Airworthy : Yuck. I dunno why it switched to that screen name, I have to use my new one because that's where I have my first class membership. Also, I have to not
33 ILUV767 : Hass, Regarding the crewing issues on between the types: United currently staffs all 767s in a 3 class config with 7 flight attendants. Some may be ad
34 Airworthy : There is no United Flt 28 between SFO and JFK. Maybe you mean Flt 22? No 777s fly JFK-Latin America, which is now, sadly, down to sole JFK-EZE service
35 ILUV767 : Hass, UA28 departs SFO at 7:00am arrives JFK at 3:19pm 767-322 UA07 departs JFK at 4:30pm arrives SFO at 7:47pm 767-322 Regarding jB...my point is tha
36 Post contains images Airworthy : David, I never argued with your narrow/widebody mix idea! I dunno why you're putting in a counterpoint when I agreed that that was the most logical th
37 Airworthy : After furhter analysis of your detailed post... Oh and not to nitpick, but the 8 767-200ETs have 125 coach seats. More about jetBlue travelers. With t
38 RayChuang : I think there is also another factor into this no one is talking about: US Post Service traffic--I think. I mean, flying SFO-JFK on an A320 ain't goin
39 Matt777 : Hi everyone, When traffic returns, wouldnt a 757-300 fit in this transcon route? What does CO do with their 757-300 fleet? Regards from Argentina Matt
40 G-CIVP : Given that BA are reducing/consolidating their present fleet, the purchase of A330 is remote. PS I think we've been here a thousand times before!!
41 SegmentKing : JetBlue is a bottom feeder airline, attracting most of its passengers from SOUTHWEST, not United. Granted they have a following of business travelers,
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...
First A330-200 For Air Europa Painted! posted Wed Mar 8 2006 16:23:53 by AlitaliaMD11
QF Order Another 2 X A330-200's For Jetstar posted Thu Feb 16 2006 15:29:38 by ANstar
1st A330-200 For Air Algerie posted Mon Jan 10 2005 23:40:22 by Jbond
A330-200 For Cubana... posted Fri Oct 24 2003 03:25:08 by Airliner777
A330-200 For Yemenia posted Thu Jun 12 2003 17:10:38 by Airmale
A330-200 For SAA (one Year Lease) posted Thu Nov 7 2002 23:48:23 by SA-JET
One More A330-200 For Qatar posted Fri Jul 26 2002 01:33:25 by QatarAirways
Airbus A330-200 For BWIA. posted Sun Jun 3 2001 17:52:50 by BWIA330
A330-200 For Mas? posted Sat May 5 2001 18:48:15 by Airbus Lover
Would There Be Demand For BRU-South America Route? posted Mon Oct 9 2006 20:31:38 by Krist0f