Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?  
User currently online727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5961 posts, RR: 17
Posted (11 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2098 times:

America West has ordered the A318, but these other A320 family carriers have not! Why not?

Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
10 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineReggaebird From Jamaica, joined Nov 1999, 1174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2082 times:

Because it is overweight and not economical maybe.

User currently offlinePtica2000 From Slovenia, joined Nov 2000, 142 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2056 times:

''Because it is overweight and not economical maybe.'' That is totally missed. Why would be A318 overweight and not economical? I don't see a point here. Please think before you write the next time.

I think that United, US, NW don't need such a small aircraft anymore as A318. Their routes are mostly quite full and they need aircrafts with capacity of A319 and bigger. For small routes they use regional jets.
I think that A318 suit AW and Frontier, while it doesn't suit to NW, UA...


User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4467 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (11 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2043 times:

That's my impression. I wonder if they're going to watch the A318 in operation with European carriers first and see what it's in-service numbers are. Clearly, USA operators of 73G's or 738's--AA, DL, and WN--aren't impressed with the 736. All three of these carriers have big fleets of old 100-seat a/c to replace, yet have shunned the 736.

100-seat planes is a vital segment of the airline business, but the economics of the industry have driven it into limbo. Low-fare carriers have driven fares down on enough routes that major carriers don't seem to think the new mainline narrobody 100-seaters (A318, 736) can make them money. It's too much metal to carry too few seats, apparently.

Yet the network airlines and their affiliates are hesitant about the lighter-weight, and undoubtedly more economical, 928 Jet, CRJ-900, etc., because of scope clause issues with unions. (Gotta love unions, all about employees, the hell with industry economics or pax) IS the 928 Jet a regional ac because it's made by Embraer, or is it a mainline a/c because it carries almost 100 pax? That'll be a fun question at the bargaining table.

At medium-size airports in the US, 100-seat aircraft were dominant in the '80s-notably the DC-9-30 and 737-200. Many of their routes don't justify 125- or 150-seat a/c at good enough frequencies for business travelers. These airports especially are watching their service turn excessively quickly into RJ's, because new, economical, and labor-friendly 100-seaters aren't on the market.


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2037 times:

Actually, Ptica2000 I have read the same stuff as Reggaebird. Several airlines including UA passed up the 318 for those exact reasons. I don't recall where I read it.

User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4467 posts, RR: 34
Reply 5, posted (11 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2022 times:

"Why would the A318 be overweight and economical?" Airframe and yield issues. The A318 shares an airframe designed originally for a 150-seat a/c, that has been "unplugged" and had a little wing-mass shrinkage.

Clearly, Northwest and United are not convinced that they can get high enough yields on the A318 to pay for that much metal with just 100 seats. 100-seat a/c are mainstays of both fleets, so it's doubtful that they think 50-seat RJ's and A319's can do the job by themselves. NW flies most of the world's DC-9s that haven't been melted for Coke cans, and UA flies a lot of 735's. 50-seat RJ's alone aren't going to do it. And as nice as RJ's are, I think Mike Boyd is right that there will be a limit to consumer acceptance of their "commuter cabins."

But until yield and labor issues can be worked out, the network carriers may well settle for a capacity gap between 50-70 seats and 125 seats.


User currently offlineFlydeltasjets From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 11 months 7 hours ago) and read 2013 times:


You forgot to say "cartel"!

User currently offlineRedngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 45
Reply 7, posted (11 years 11 months 6 hours ago) and read 1985 times:

USAirways wouldn't need it because USAirways Express has CRJs, ERJs, and DH-8-300's, which although they are smaller, work well with its current capacity settings.


Up, up and away!
User currently offlineCba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (11 years 11 months 5 hours ago) and read 1942 times:

Neither the A318 nor 736 are selling too well. The 736 barely cheaper than the 73G to operate, but it carries 20 less seats. Same thing with the A318 and A319. Neither the 736 nor A318 is profitable on the short sectors that 100 seat aircraft are used on. Also, many carriers operate the 735, which really isn't that old. The oldest 735 flying is barely 10 years old. Airlines such as UA, CO, and WN are satisfied with the 735, and have no nead to replace it.

Regional Jets are nice, but 90-100 seats is just too big to be called a regional jet. 20-30 years ago, routes that needed a capacity between 70 and 100 were operated by DC-9's (DC-9-10, 80 seats). Now, we have 70 seat regional jets. IMO, the largest regional jet should be the 70 seaters (CRJ-700, ERJ-170). Anything above 70 seats should be considered mainline.

The 717 is the perfect aircraft for the 100 seat market. It is extremely efficient to operate, and the cabin is roomy and comfortable, not a sardine can like regional jets. Air Tran loves its 717's, and so did TWA. Problem is, nobody wants to order it because it has no family.

User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 11 months 5 hours ago) and read 1924 times:

Sorry, the A318 doesn't hold much in common w/ the A319/20 except for some spars built in another country. Cockpit holds some familiarity, but not much.

And a ///CLOSE/// friend at Fleet Planning said in FACT the reason United won't go for it IS because of the weight of the aircraft.. it's "inefficient" compared to the B737-500.

the bird may be able to fly 8 gazillion miles, but it's such a small plane you'd have to literally FILL it to the brim before you make money.

There are a few other operational issues with it that didn't appease to a few of the major US Carriers, so lets just leave it at that.

Airbus *OR* Boeing will never make a perfect product.. some of ya just need to accept that!  Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlineJmacias34 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 379 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1808 times:

Airbus *OR* Boeing will never make a perfect product.. some of ya just need to accept that!

I'll go a step further and ask if it possible to define a perfect product in terms of an airliner?

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...
Flashback: UNITED/US Airways Merger In 2000 posted Thu Nov 16 2006 05:34:48 by Jimyvr
United, US Airways From Miami...expectations? posted Sun Mar 20 2005 20:56:58 by SHUPirate1
Northwest....why No 767? posted Wed Feb 11 2004 08:41:45 by AirxLiban
US Airways Pilots Vote No Confidence In Management posted Sat May 24 2003 02:29:47 by Artsyman
United - US Airways Cooperation posted Thu Jul 25 2002 17:53:48 by Andie007
United/US Airways Merge posted Sat Nov 17 2001 04:52:53 by SWA737pilot
The Future Of The United-US Airways Deal posted Sun Jul 1 2001 03:22:34 by ILUV767
United: US Airways Deal Isn't Dead posted Sat May 12 2001 20:49:17 by United Airline
UNITED/US Airways Merger Rejected posted Sun Apr 1 2001 20:14:45 by TEDSKI
United/US Airways Merger Challenged posted Wed Dec 20 2000 01:03:34 by CNBC