Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UA To Go All A32X-single Aisle?  
User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 852 posts, RR: 2
Posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2474 times:

It´s now nerly 150 single aisles 319/20´s
in UA´s fleet.....
737´s to go, or?

Michael in Stockholm/SE
 Big thumbs up


Airbus SAS - Love them both
24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDoug_Or From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3402 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2452 times:

73s will still be around for at least a while. Also, don't froget that big 'ole bunch of 75s....


When in doubt, one B pump off
User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 852 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2435 times:

Yeah, I know about the 757, but
what puzzles me is that AA dont
have ANY (zero) 319/20.....
On the other hand they got Eastern´s
old A 300´s (or is it East. old fleet of 300´s?)
Thanks

Michael, Sthlm/SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineGodbless From Sweden, joined Apr 2000, 2752 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2415 times:

The A300 fleet of AA was ordered by AA and all 35 (now 34 left) only flew for AA and never Eastern. Eastern also never had the A300-600...

Max


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2341 times:

AA filled that category with 738s. I think AA bought their A300-600Rs brand new from Airbus. If UA (hopefully) weathers the current crisis, I think it will replace the 737s with A319s when their retirement rolls around.

User currently offlineUAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2310 times:

United's long term plan is to retire the 737s in favor of A320s when they are old enough to go. The 737-300s may start in 5 years or so, since they entered service in 1988, 20 years is old enough for an airplane. The 737-500s are even newer, but the rumor is since there are only 50 of them, United may slate them for retirement if they have to cut fleet size any further.

The 767-200 fleet is getting rather old, those may go soon too.


User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2304 times:

I can see why UAL would do this, they will experience a huge cost saving by streamlining the single-aisle fleet into a single type in the long term.


I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineUAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2305 times:

United's long term plan is to retire the 737s in favor of A320s when they are old enough to go. The 737-300s may start in 5 years or so, since they entered service in 1988, 20 years is old enough for an airplane. The 737-500s are even newer, but the rumor is since there are only 50 of them, United may slate them for retirement if they have to cut fleet size any further.

The 767-200 fleet is getting rather old, those may go soon too.


User currently offlineUALrampORD From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 2177 times:

I hate the fact that sooner or later United may retire the 737s in favor for airbus. The thing that bugs me the most is that the 767-200s may be on there way out as well. They are a fun airplane to fly on and a great plane all together. I also think its only a matter of time before United gets its first heavy airbus(pending on weather they pull through this or not).

UALrampORD


User currently offlineGodbless From Sweden, joined Apr 2000, 2752 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 2176 times:

I think United has other problems then to replace the 737's by A320's. With such large fleets as United has of each the A32X and the 737 it doesn't matter anymore that they have extra costs as the large fleets in itself create enough cost savings (it's said to be after about 50 frames of a type).

I can imagine that they will reduce the number of 737's in service rather than reducing numbers of Airbus's if the need arises but I can't see them doing the desaterous thing replacing B's with A's...

And if you look at the 727 which would have still be in service for United today if 9/11 wouldn't have been then I do give the 737's another few years.

After all I do hope that UA won't follow PanAm.

Max


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2116 times:

I am a loyal United customer who hopes to see them pull through their current situation. BUT as a U.S. taxpayer and someone who they are looking to for help in the form of government loans, if they go all bus, then playing with my patriotic strings end and they can go the way of Pan Am.

I highly doubt they will go all bus as Boeing is one of their biggest creditors.



"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

CX747,

Have you ever considered that a great proportion of components and systems on board every Airbus aircraft is American? And that a great proportion of components and systems on board every Boeing aircraft is European?

Your patriotism, while admirable, kind of goes out the window.

Your concern as a "loyal customer" of United should be them pulling through the current crisis they find themselves in, and like it or not that means steamlining the single-aisle fleet to obtain the most economical long-term benefit, not being concerned about where final assembly of the airframes takes place.



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2090 times:

You are correct, maybe patriotism has to be moved aside, then again Continental, Delta and American are going all Boeing. I understand the component arguement though. I just find it hard to see United crying it's eyes out while Continental, Delta and American all just battle on.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineUAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2080 times:

United is NOT going all-Airbus...they are way too in-love with the 757 and 777 to do that.

User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2078 times:

I think it is unfair to say that United is only in the position it is in now (relative to CO/DL/AA) simply because it flies Airbus aircraft. JetBlue does not seem to be in the same situation and they are 100% Airbus.

Poor management at one level or another is usually to blame for these kind of things (who said British Airways???).

I must say I prefer Boeing from a personal point of view, and dread the day my airline announces a big Airbus order (which is probable over the next 6 months). At the same time though whenever I have flown as a passenger on the A320 it flies like it's on rails...

That's a different discussion altogether though Big grin



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2073 times:

Oh no, no, no, no no. They are not in trouble because of operating Airbus aircraft. That is NOT what I meant. I just feel that while other carriers have ordered from Boeing, United has gone to Airbus and now in a crunch want help from the U.S. and it's citizens.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8092 posts, RR: 54
Reply 16, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2057 times:

I don't think Airbus receive unfair subsidy - low interest loans are the only way to finance massive cost, slow return projects like new jet transports. Compare the two product lines to see who is best at financing new types. (And in any case the proportion of an Airbus that is Made In The USA is 40% so there's not much to complain about in any case.)

THAT SAID, let's say Airbus DID receive masses of free money to stick it to Boeing, and sell planes below cost. Hey, if the Europeans want to give away planes to US carriers, then surely that will benefit the airlines' bottom line. What kind of United shareholder would criticise such a situation?



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineUAL-Fan From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 374 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2054 times:

I agree with CX747, this Airbus thing really irritates me.

User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2042 times:

I disagree. You can't say you're not going to give assistance and aid to one major airline just because it didn't purchase a bunch of aircraft from a US manufacturer! That has nothing to do with the government.


I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineThumper From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 550 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2020 times:

I know I wont be flying United or Jetblue,I will stay with Delta,CO, AND Southwest!

User currently offlineHlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2014 times:

If United doesnt pull out of its current crisis, it may be getting rid of both its 737s and A320s when they are liquidated.

User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8092 posts, RR: 54
Reply 21, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1989 times:

For god's sake UAL-Fan and Thumper (and others), why does it matter if it's Airbus or Boeing? As I pointed out, an Airbus is 40% Made In The USA, which is probably about the same as anything "built" (should read: "assembled") in Seattle.


fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8092 posts, RR: 54
Reply 22, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1957 times:

To illustrate my point, here is a story from a recent thread about Chinese-built MD80s:

"My comment on passengers not knowing they were flying a Chinese airliner is because I could just picture my grandfather getting worked up over it if he found out. I was flying with him when we got on an American Airlines Airbus A300. He says "what the h*ll is an Airbus!" when he took out the safety card. I told him it was European and he was quite upset that "American" Airlines didn't fly American airliners. He actually placed a call to complain afterward!

He was a WWII pilot and is quite "patriotic". He had a fit when I bought a Honda Accord until I proved to him it was almost 100% American made and that his Chrysler Cirrus was made in Mexico with a Japanese engine. So much for being patriotic."



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineFlyboy80 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1878 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1872 times:

United was origionaly in favor of the 737-400 but sense they took over a large portion of Pan Am (which then operated an extential European network, because there werent large alliances then) So there fore there were a few European countries that basically said they would charge more fees if United didnt go along with the A320 family aircraft, so then UA said that they would keep there European network seperate from the US one (Operate airbuses there and 737s here) but then alliances came into play, so then UA no longer needed to operate inter european flights (with a hub, i beleive it was destant to be FRA) heavily because of its partneirs, so now the US has those original airbuses flying over here, and united ordered more and more of them, so now today the United Mainline US fleet is largely airbus single isle jets, and they are still coming!!! lol BTW if you check the photo database you should be able to see a neat part of history, pictures of UA 727s and DAL 727s operating schduled inter- european services thoroughout the many European airports.

User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1862 times:

The 757 as an exception to United's plan for an all-airbus narrowbody fleet
shows the value of the type.

There is a reason Boeing's 757 and Airbus's A-300 remain in production even though the designs are not only old but not even updated all that much. It is because their is no real equivalent to either one in the competitors lineup. American keeps its A300 because Boeing can't match its cargo capacity. United and America West keep the 757 because Airbus can't give them that big of a narrowbody. A long narrowbody has some efficiency advantages when it comes to transporting allot of passengers with not as much cargo.

The 757 allows Boeing to keep a foothold in fleets that favor Airbus. The A300 does the same for the other side - giving Airbus a foothold in American's fleet.


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...
AA To Go All Mainline At MSY posted Sun May 7 2006 16:15:02 by MSYtristar
What Led DL And CO To Go All-Boeing? posted Thu Nov 10 2005 20:10:13 by 1337Delta764
USAirways To Go All Contract Ramp In ROC posted Mon Jan 31 2005 08:27:51 by AEroc
Kuwait Airways To Go All-Airbus? posted Thu Feb 21 2002 18:43:55 by Na
WN To Go All Boeing posted Thu Jul 19 2001 04:26:49 by TWA717_200
Ansett To Go All Airbus... posted Wed Jul 18 2001 17:14:37 by Aduum
UA Crews Go To Nascar Pit Crew Training School! posted Sun Mar 26 2006 03:29:59 by PanAm747
FAA To Penalize All For UA,AA ORD Actions posted Thu Aug 19 2004 05:04:22 by Alphascan
East Coast To W. Coast In A Single Aisle Plane posted Fri Oct 31 2003 20:30:11 by Tolosy
Does UA/AA Deserve To Go Out Of Business! posted Fri May 2 2003 08:34:05 by Beno