User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 3:14 am

As AA's fleet renewal presses on, as well as the additional recent deferral of the A350, it will be interesting to see what will be added or removed from AA's fleet plan.

AA is removing their fleet of 9x A330-300s next year, which are aging and have an oddball engine type. Considering the amount of 787s on option and the deferral of the A350-900s, what would be wrong with swapping the A350 order for 25x-30x A339s?

The A330-900neo provides as a suitable A333 and maybe a 763 replacement for some missions with a not so different engine from the Trent 700 powered A332s.

Thoughts?

Image
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
UsAir737
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 1:26 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 3:34 am

Ultimately I think the AA widebody fleet will consist of A350-900, 787-8,9 and maybe an order for the -10, the 772/3. The 332 and 772 will be replaced with 787/350 and those aircraft can then replace 763. The 359 can eventually replace the 772 on longer routes and the 78J would be a good fit on shorter routes. Also, the MoM can find a place here but still being a paper airplane can be left out of the conversation at this time. My 2¢...
Long live US/ HP the airline that took over the world!
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 3:49 am

UsAir737 wrote:
Ultimately I think the AA widebody fleet will consist of A350-900, 787-8,9 and maybe an order for the -10, the 772/3. The 332 and 772 will be replaced with 787/350 and those aircraft can then replace 763. The 359 can eventually replace the 772 on longer routes and the 78J would be a good fit on shorter routes. Also, the MoM can find a place here but still being a paper airplane can be left out of the conversation at this time. My 2¢...


The problem the A350 has at AA is that it's an entirely new type to integrate. While it would serve as an ideal replacement to the 77Es, the same can be said for the 787-9, and AA has plenty of 787 options. Swapping to the A330neo adds some flexibility to the fleet.

The A330-200 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

I'm still not entirely convinced AA will order the 787-10 either.

As for the MoM, I think AA may get it or the A321neoPLUS/A322. Speculation.
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 5136
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 4:01 am

Boeing778X wrote:
UsAir737 wrote:
Ultimately I think the AA widebody fleet will consist of A350-900, 787-8,9 and maybe an order for the -10, the 772/3. The 332 and 772 will be replaced with 787/350 and those aircraft can then replace 763. The 359 can eventually replace the 772 on longer routes and the 78J would be a good fit on shorter routes. Also, the MoM can find a place here but still being a paper airplane can be left out of the conversation at this time. My 2¢...


The problem the A350 has at AA is that it's an entirely new type to integrate. While it would serve as an ideal replacement to the 77Es, the same can be said for the 787-9, and AA has plenty of 787 options. Swapping to the A330neo adds some flexibility to the fleet.

The A330-200 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

I'm still not entirely convinced AA will order the 787-10 either.

As for the MoM, I think AA may get it or the A321neoPLUS/A322. Speculation.

There comes a time in every airlines life where they have to stop pussyfooting around and integrate a new fleet type.
Eat 'em up Kats!
 
cheapgreek
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2017 3:57 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 4:18 am

TWA772LR wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
UsAir737 wrote:
Ultimately I think the AA widebody fleet will consist of A350-900, 787-8,9 and maybe an order for the -10, the 772/3. The 332 and 772 will be replaced with 787/350 and those aircraft can then replace 763. The 359 can eventually replace the 772 on longer routes and the 78J would be a good fit on shorter routes. Also, the MoM can find a place here but still being a paper airplane can be left out of the conversation at this time. My 2¢...


The problem the A350 has at AA is that it's an entirely new type to integrate. While it would serve as an ideal replacement to the 77Es, the same can be said for the 787-9, and AA has plenty of 787 options. Swapping to the A330neo adds some flexibility to the fleet.

The A330-200 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

I'm still not entirely convinced AA will order the 787-10 either.

As for the MoM, I think AA may get it or the A321neoPLUS/A322. Speculation.

There comes a time in every airlines life where they have to stop pussyfooting around and integrate a new fleet type.


Why add another fleet type when Boeing's offerings cover all the bases and they are building up a large fleet of 787's. Makes no sense to add a small number of Airbus wide bodies to a predominately large number of 787's that's growing. AA also flies the 777 and with the new 777-9 having an EAS in a few years, AA may order those also, so what more is needed?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 9084
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 4:23 am

Boeing778X wrote:
The A330-200 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Which is why there's another option that you don't seem to be considering-- a small order of A333CEOs:
at 242T, perfect commonality, and (most importantly) bottom-barrel acquisition prices, it could present a compelling case as well.

AA isn't DL, but AA isn't above a killer deal either.

It could allow them to punt on making an all-new integration choice: by internally shuffling around capacity within the existing fleet, until (1) the MOM is defined and (2) the 787/A350 are undergoing 2nd-decade PIPs/refreshes.

THEN they could decide how best to finish off any remnants from its 777 and 767 fleet.
Just a possibility.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
kimimm19
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 9:10 am

If the goal, which it seems to be in general as a cost saving measure (with widebodies more so than narrowbodies), then I don't see this happening. I think the 787 family with the -10 will all make great TATL aircraft, while as it seems with Delta, the a350 will be mainly Pacific based given its capabilities. I just don't see the point, which is sad as the a330 is a brilliant aircraft. This is before all the 777s are taken into account as well.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 24645
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 9:18 am

Boeing778X wrote:
The problem the A350 has at AA is that it's an entirely new type to integrate.


I'm not sure why you describe that as "a problem". A big carrier like AA can perfectly handle the introduction of a new type. Just like they introduced the 787 at one point.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
sagechan
Posts: 121
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 6:14 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 1:52 pm

While i can understand why the A330-900 would be ordered (better CASM for moderate bump im capital outlay) , if a conversion were done it seems that either more A330-200s or - 800s would be a better fit size wise as its a bit larger than the 787-8 and smaller than the 787-9/772s so less redundancy.
717, 733, 734, 738, 744, 752, 772, A319, A320, A321, A332, A333, MD88, CRJ, CR7, CR9, DH8, DH3, S340, ER4, E170, E175, E190/CO, NW, US, AC, NH, AA, UA, DL, WN, WS, SK, VY
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 6978
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 2:02 pm

sagechan wrote:
While i can understand why the A330-900 would be ordered (better CASM for moderate bump im capital outlay) , if a conversion were done it seems that either more A330-200s or - 800s would be a better fit size wise as its a bit larger than the 787-8 and smaller than the 787-9/772s so less redundancy.

The 788 and A332/A338 are basically equivalent in size. AA's A332s just seat more because they (like all of exUS's widebodies) are configured far less premium than the 788s.
 
Flighty
Posts: 8684
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 2:11 pm

I certainly don't know any facts or internal information anymore, but yes, the 339neo would seem to be well suited to AA's needs. This would be for USA-Europe 772/A333 jobs as well as former Latin America A300 and 772 jobs. I think that sums up to quite a big amount of airplanes. Am I wrong that AA will retire 772s gradually? Perhaps that is a flaw in my reasoning.

But yes, it seems likely enough. It's a "cheap" and good solution to many missions. I can see how it would be THE most profitable aircraft for certain assignments. Not everything is ULR.
 
sagechan
Posts: 121
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 6:14 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 2:20 pm

Polot wrote:
sagechan wrote:
While i can understand why the A330-900 would be ordered (better CASM for moderate bump im capital outlay) , if a conversion were done it seems that either more A330-200s or - 800s would be a better fit size wise as its a bit larger than the 787-8 and smaller than the 787-9/772s so less redundancy.

The 788 and A332/A338 are basically equivalent in size. AA's A332s just seat more because they (like all of exUS's widebodies) are configured far less premium than the 788s.


I know they are quite close and configuration does make a difference, though i think (not 100% sure) the A330-200 has slightly more floor area, though its 8 across vs 9 so probably ends up a wash. But I dont see AA taking anymore - 8s, though i do expect the options to eventually be exercised as 772 replacements for the - 9.

Taking the A350 is probably still most likely, but unless AA has plans for TPAC from ex-US hubs, which seems unlikely, I think a conversion to A330s does makes sense. A330 seems to be a good bird to place in CLT/PHL/MIA, a mix of the two sizes to rotate between Northern/Southern summer peaks would do well.
717, 733, 734, 738, 744, 752, 772, A319, A320, A321, A332, A333, MD88, CRJ, CR7, CR9, DH8, DH3, S340, ER4, E170, E175, E190/CO, NW, US, AC, NH, AA, UA, DL, WN, WS, SK, VY
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 3:21 pm

KarelXWB wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The problem the A350 has at AA is that it's an entirely new type to integrate.


I'm not sure why you describe that as "a problem". A big carrier like AA can perfectly handle the introduction of a new type. Just like they introduced the 787 at one point.


That's true. However, AA never ordered the A350, US did, and I'm not sure AA would have ordered the type on their own, given the amount of 787s they have on order and access to.
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
texl1649
Posts: 457
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 4:50 pm

The top 797 ER will probably cover AA need for more frames with a common 787 type rating if they think they need something in the 788 seating range when the 332 are older and the 788 is out of production in the mid 2020's. 330neo will likely be winding down production at that point.
 
GripenFan
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 7:41 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 6:23 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The A330-200 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Which is why there's another option that you don't seem to be considering-- a small order of A333CEOs:
at 242T, perfect commonality, and (most importantly) bottom-barrel acquisition prices, it could present a compelling case as well.

AA isn't DL, but AA isn't above a killer deal either.

It could allow them to punt on making an all-new integration choice: by internally shuffling around capacity within the existing fleet, until (1) the MOM is defined and (2) the 787/A350 are undergoing 2nd-decade PIPs/refreshes.

THEN they could decide how best to finish off any remnants from its 777 and 767 fleet.
Just a possibility.


I've often questioned the wisdom of brining in the A350 as a B772 replacement; it's just too big. Being roughly the same size/capacity I thought the B787-9 is a better B772 replacement over the Pacific and thought AA should swap the A350 order for A330NEOs to replace the -200ERs to Europe & Latin America. I hadn't considered the 242T A330, but agree that's a good (maybe even better) option; AA gets the proverbial "end of production" discount, and Airbus fills slots before NEO production gets up to speed.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 10:21 pm

GripenFan wrote:
LAX772LR wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The A330-200 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

Which is why there's another option that you don't seem to be considering-- a small order of A333CEOs:
at 242T, perfect commonality, and (most importantly) bottom-barrel acquisition prices, it could present a compelling case as well.

AA isn't DL, but AA isn't above a killer deal either.

It could allow them to punt on making an all-new integration choice: by internally shuffling around capacity within the existing fleet, until (1) the MOM is defined and (2) the 787/A350 are undergoing 2nd-decade PIPs/refreshes.

THEN they could decide how best to finish off any remnants from its 777 and 767 fleet.
Just a possibility.


I've often questioned the wisdom of brining in the A350 as a B772 replacement; it's just too big. Being roughly the same size/capacity I thought the B787-9 is a better B772 replacement over the Pacific and thought AA should swap the A350 order for A330NEOs to replace the -200ERs to Europe & Latin America. I hadn't considered the 242T A330, but agree that's a good (maybe even better) option; AA gets the proverbial "end of production" discount, and Airbus fills slots before NEO production gets up to speed.


I think that's a great idea. Is it possible to get a 242T A330-300 with Trent 700 engines?
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
jfk777
Posts: 6222
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 10:53 pm

sagechan wrote:
Polot wrote:
sagechan wrote:
While i can understand why the A330-900 would be ordered (better CASM for moderate bump im capital outlay) , if a conversion were done it seems that either more A330-200s or - 800s would be a better fit size wise as its a bit larger than the 787-8 and smaller than the 787-9/772s so less redundancy.

The 788 and A332/A338 are basically equivalent in size. AA's A332s just seat more because they (like all of exUS's widebodies) are configured far less premium than the 788s.


I know they are quite close and configuration does make a difference, though i think (not 100% sure) the A330-200 has slightly more floor area, though its 8 across vs 9 so probably ends up a wash. But I dont see AA taking anymore - 8s, though i do expect the options to eventually be exercised as 772 replacements for the - 9.

Taking the A350 is probably still most likely, but unless AA has plans for TPAC from ex-US hubs, which seems unlikely, I think a conversion to A330s does makes sense. A330 seems to be a good bird to place in CLT/PHL/MIA, a mix of the two sizes to rotate between Northern/Southern summer peaks would do well.


At some point CLT & PHL are going to have to be compittent in 787 and 777, they are going to have to be Un- Airbused. The ring fencing of long haul Airbus at the two Usair hubs has to end
 
sagechan
Posts: 121
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 6:14 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 11:21 pm

jfk777 wrote:
sagechan wrote:
Polot wrote:
The 788 and A332/A338 are basically equivalent in size. AA's A332s just seat more because they (like all of exUS's widebodies) are configured far less premium than the 788s.


I know they are quite close and configuration does make a difference, though i think (not 100% sure) the A330-200 has slightly more floor area, though its 8 across vs 9 so probably ends up a wash. But I dont see AA taking anymore - 8s, though i do expect the options to eventually be exercised as 772 replacements for the - 9.

Taking the A350 is probably still most likely, but unless AA has plans for TPAC from ex-US hubs, which seems unlikely, I think a conversion to A330s does makes sense. A330 seems to be a good bird to place in CLT/PHL/MIA, a mix of the two sizes to rotate between Northern/Southern summer peaks would do well.


At some point CLT & PHL are going to have to be compittent in 787 and 777, they are going to have to be Un- Airbused. The ring fencing of long haul Airbus at the two Usair hubs has to end


Since the issue of the thread is basically what to do with the existing Airbus order it leads to discussion of what if makes since.

The only thing that makes sense for the LUS hubs to remain airbus widebody, as long as AA has airbus widebodies, is that the LUS hubs typically have less premium and more connecting demand even within the new AA network. Id assume that any airbus widebodies, except possibly the A350 if delivered, will continue to be on the lower end in premium cabin seats.

If there were a good way to get out of the Airbus widebody fleets, i think AA would take it because of its existing fleet size would be ideal for an all 787 and 777 fleet. But in relation to this thread and the fact that AA has A330s now and A350s on order leads to speculation where they would best be deployed and to me thata the existing LUS hubs and MIA (GRU can retain some 77W service) make the most sense.
717, 733, 734, 738, 744, 752, 772, A319, A320, A321, A332, A333, MD88, CRJ, CR7, CR9, DH8, DH3, S340, ER4, E170, E175, E190/CO, NW, US, AC, NH, AA, UA, DL, WN, WS, SK, VY
 
planespotter20
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 11:31 pm

If the commonality between the a359 and a339 is pretty good, why wouldn't they operate two smallish fleets (15 a359s + 15 a339s) of each and they could cover broader part of the market. I know this is unlikely given the 787s but Airbus fans are allowed to dream too.
 
ahj2000
Posts: 757
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 5:34 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Fri May 19, 2017 11:53 pm

planespotter20 wrote:
If the commonality between the a359 and a339 is pretty good, why wouldn't they operate two smallish fleets (15 a359s + 15 a339s) of each and they could cover broader part of the market. I know this is unlikely given the 787s but Airbus fans are allowed to dream too.

Delta did 25+25 right? Maybe not that far off considering that A339 to South America would do pretty darn well from MIA. (Also the 359 to JNB :D )
-Andrés Juánez
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 9084
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 1:13 am

GripenFan wrote:
I've often questioned the wisdom of brining in the A350 as a B772 replacement; it's just too big. Being roughly the same size/capacity I thought the B787-9 is a better B772 replacement

Sure, but that's predicated on the common-yet-fallacious assumption that "replacement" automatically means equivalent/similar size. As we've so often seen, that's not necessarily what interests airlines.

As a whole, we've seen them move the "sweet spot" for replacement up (73G to 738, A320 to A321, 767 to A330) in some models/derivatives, and in others we've seen them move the sweet spot down (747 to 777/A350).
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5500
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 10:53 am

planespotter20 wrote:
If the commonality between the a359 and a339 is pretty good, why wouldn't they operate two smallish fleets (15 a359s + 15 a339s) of each and they could cover broader part of the market. I know this is unlikely given the 787s but Airbus fans are allowed to dream too.



As an outsider DL operate a few 744's soon to be gone, a smallish 777 fleet and still a large 763 fleet that will need replacing, they operate a large A330 fleet already so more A330's and A350's make a lot of sense since they seem to be simplifying their fleet.

AA have a large 777 fleet and will have a large 787 fleet with still quite a few younger 763's, then they inherited a smallish A330 fleet of which 9 A333's will leave soon leaving 15? A332's. Then there are 22 A359's on order which was a inherited from US aswell, I agree integrating a new type won't be an issue but at the same time AA have a large 787 fleet, maybe when the 772's need replacing a mix of more 789's plus A359's at the upper end could make sense otherwise maybe 78-10's for Europe
mainly I guess due range with the A359's being swapped for something else?

To me More A330's would seem unlikely NEO or CEO.
 
mig17
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 12:17 pm

The 787 is a 767 / A330 replacement. Commercially speacking, the 767 is already gone because of the A330 success. And now, it is the time of the A330 decline because of the 787. Except Airbus betted that they could still sell numbers of A330NEO or even CEO to customers with large A330 fleets and/or without 787 on order. It worked with DL for exemple.

But in AA's case, they should not be needing new A330 since they choose the 787. It makes no sence to oparates both the 787-9/10 and the A330-900 except if you intend to split your fleet between two different manufacturers. In the end the 787 and A350 will replace 767, A330 and 777 at AA.
 
planespotter20
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 5:03 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 12:44 pm

mig17 wrote:
The 787 is a 767 / A330 replacement. Commercially speacking, the 767 is already gone because of the A330 success. And now, it is the time of the A330 decline because of the 787. Except Airbus betted that they could still sell numbers of A330NEO or even CEO to customers with large A330 fleets and/or without 787 on order. It worked with DL for exemple.

But in AA's case, they should not be needing new A330 since they choose the 787. It makes no sence to oparates both the 787-9/10 and the A330-900 except if you intend to split your fleet between two different manufacturers. In the end the 787 and A350 will replace 767, A330 and 777 at AA.


Maybe they view the 787s as over-capable for most of the TATL market, and they'd rather use the large fleet where money is to be made. That could be where the a339 comes into play, it wouldn't be a huge fleet, as I said, a 15/20 or 15/15 split of neos to a359s (convert a few a359s and add some a339s).

If the price is right, I don't see why AA wouldn't want to use the marvel that is the 787 on routes in the pacific, which are made for that plane, and then use the a339, for TATL. It could also serve as a stop gap for 767 replacements.

AA is flying almost all 788s on TATL from ORD, maybe they are seeing what the 787 behaves like over the Atlantic, to see if they should continue its use to Europe or find a new fleet type.

In my eyes it's highly unlikely they will ever order the neos, but when you speculate you have to ask if and that's what I'm doing.

On a side note, is there a possibility of some a350-1000s at AA?
 
mig17
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 2:09 pm

planespotter20 wrote:
mig17 wrote:
The 787 is a 767 / A330 replacement. Commercially speacking, the 767 is already gone because of the A330 success. And now, it is the time of the A330 decline because of the 787. Except Airbus betted that they could still sell numbers of A330NEO or even CEO to customers with large A330 fleets and/or without 787 on order. It worked with DL for exemple.

But in AA's case, they should not be needing new A330 since they choose the 787. It makes no sence to oparates both the 787-9/10 and the A330-900 except if you intend to split your fleet between two different manufacturers. In the end the 787 and A350 will replace 767, A330 and 777 at AA.


Maybe they view the 787s as over-capable for most of the TATL market, and they'd rather use the large fleet where money is to be made. That could be where the a339 comes into play, it wouldn't be a huge fleet, as I said, a 15/20 or 15/15 split of neos to a359s (convert a few a359s and add some a339s).

If the price is right, I don't see why AA wouldn't want to use the marvel that is the 787 on routes in the pacific, which are made for that plane, and then use the a339, for TATL. It could also serve as a stop gap for 767 replacements.

AA is flying almost all 788s on TATL from ORD, maybe they are seeing what the 787 behaves like over the Atlantic, to see if they should continue its use to Europe or find a new fleet type.

In my eyes it's highly unlikely they will ever order the neos, but when you speculate you have to ask if and that's what I'm doing.

On a side note, is there a possibility of some a350-1000s at AA?

As much as I would love AA to order new A330-900 or even -300, I don't see it happening. Until 2018, there is 14 767 to be replaced. Then the 9 A333 will go. That is 23 planes leaving. In the main time, 16 787-9 are coming online and then after 2020, 20 A359. On a one to one basis, it left 13 A359 to replace some of the remaining 767 or some 772.
If AA orders more new widebodies now, there are more chances it will be 787-9, 787-10 and A350-900 coming in after 2024 to replace the rest of the 763/772/A332 fleet or for growth. Later, yes I think they will order the A350-1000 to replace some of the 772 and most of the 77W.
 
hkcanadaexpat
Posts: 1867
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 3:33 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 2:24 pm

mig17 wrote:
Until 2018, there is 14 767 to be replaced. Then the 9 A333 will go. That is 23 planes leaving. In the main time, 16 787-9 are coming online and then after 2020, 20 A359. On a one to one basis, it left 13 A359 to replace some of the remaining 767 or some 772.
If AA orders more new widebodies now, there are more chances it will be 787-9, 787-10 and A350-900 coming in after 2024 to replace the rest of the 763/772/A332 fleet or for growth. Later, yes I think they will order the A350-1000 to replace some of the 772 and most of the 77W.

The math on the 767s is not 1 for 1 as you hint it to be. A lot of those 767s are flying domestic mainland flights and will be replaced by A320s and 737s. So assuming that all 767s are replaced by widebodies as they leave the fleet is inaccurate.
 
mig17
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 2:31 pm

hkcanadaexpat wrote:
mig17 wrote:
Until 2018, there is 14 767 to be replaced. Then the 9 A333 will go. That is 23 planes leaving. In the main time, 16 787-9 are coming online and then after 2020, 20 A359. On a one to one basis, it left 13 A359 to replace some of the remaining 767 or some 772.
If AA orders more new widebodies now, there are more chances it will be 787-9, 787-10 and A350-900 coming in after 2024 to replace the rest of the 763/772/A332 fleet or for growth. Later, yes I think they will order the A350-1000 to replace some of the 772 and most of the 77W.

The math on the 767s is not 1 for 1 as you hint it to be. A lot of those 767s are flying domestic mainland flights and will be replaced by A320s and 737s. So assuming that all 767s are replaced by widebodies as they leave the fleet is inaccurate.

True, so the 36 widebodies currently on order will preferably replace the A333 or the 772 and part of the 763.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 2:59 pm

mig17 wrote:
The 787 is a 767 / A330 replacement. Commercially speacking, the 767 is already gone because of the A330 success. And now, it is the time of the A330 decline because of the 787. Except Airbus betted that they could still sell numbers of A330NEO or even CEO to customers with large A330 fleets and/or without 787 on order. It worked with DL for exemple.

But in AA's case, they should not be needing new A330 since they choose the 787. It makes no sence to oparates both the 787-9/10 and the A330-900 except if you intend to split your fleet between two different manufacturers. In the end the 787 and A350 will replace 767, A330 and 777 at AA.


The 777 is going nowhere anytime soon. The 77Es will get replaced with the 789, and the A359 assuming the orders hold up, but the 77Ws are here to stay. We may even see the 777-9 at AA at some point.
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
mig17
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 3:12 pm

We may even see the 777-9 at AA at some point.

I doubt that.
 
User avatar
precure787
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2015 9:44 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 4:03 pm

That'll work as a replacement for the A330-300 and some 777-200ER aircraft.
Edward Zen/Precure 787
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8940
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sat May 20, 2017 7:10 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
As a whole, we've seen them move the "sweet spot" for replacement up (73G to 738, A320 to A321, 767 to A330) in some models/derivatives, and in others we've seen them move the sweet spot down (747 to 777/A350).


Regarding the narrow-body sweet spot:

1. The A320neo has outsold the A321neo by 3:1.
2. The 757-200 was a growth replacement of the 727-200, and the 757-200 remarkably didn't outsell its predecessor.
3. The 737-800 and A320 were both like-for-like replacements of the 727-200. Both sold in legendary quantities

I'd argue that the 150-180 seat segment has always been a local optimum for narrowbody aircraft. I would further argue that the reason the 737 models "grew" with each generation was because Boeing was moving closer and closer to this local optimum that has existed for - really - 40 or 50 years.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sun May 21, 2017 1:55 am

mig17 wrote:
We may even see the 777-9 at AA at some point.

I doubt that.


Please elaborate. A 777-300ER/-9 fleet at AA would work well. You know AA can't do what they do with just 787s and A350s.

ZK-NBT wrote:
planespotter20 wrote:
If the commonality between the a359 and a339 is pretty good, why wouldn't they operate two smallish fleets (15 a359s + 15 a339s) of each and they could cover broader part of the market. I know this is unlikely given the 787s but Airbus fans are allowed to dream too.



As an outsider DL operate a few 744's soon to be gone, a smallish 777 fleet and still a large 763 fleet that will need replacing, they operate a large A330 fleet already so more A330's and A350's make a lot of sense since they seem to be simplifying their fleet.

AA have a large 777 fleet and will have a large 787 fleet with still quite a few younger 763's, then they inherited a smallish A330 fleet of which 9 A333's will leave soon leaving 15? A332's. Then there are 22 A359's on order which was a inherited from US aswell, I agree integrating a new type won't be an issue but at the same time AA have a large 787 fleet, maybe when the 772's need replacing a mix of more 789's plus A359's at the upper end could make sense otherwise maybe 78-10's for Europe
mainly I guess due range with the A359's being swapped for something else?

To me More A330's would seem unlikely NEO or CEO.


The idea was that since AA has an A330 subfleet, integrating the A339 could be done cheaply without much hassle.

For an airline like AA, adding the A350 really wouldn't be that big of a deal in the end. The 15x A332s are new, but oddball, but not like the A333s. Adding the A359s for 77E replacements work, but the presence of the 789 makes it redundant for that role.

Perhaps the A359s could be used to grow PHL, CLT and MIA.
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
trex8
Posts: 4838
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sun May 21, 2017 2:06 am

Boeing778X wrote:

I think that's a great idea. Is it possible to get a 242T A330-300 with Trent 700 engines?


except for DL I think every other 242t A333 operator have Rollers.
 
Boof02671
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sun May 21, 2017 2:10 am

UsAir737 wrote:
Ultimately I think the AA widebody fleet will consist of A350-900, 787-8,9 and maybe an order for the -10, the 772/3. The 332 and 772 will be replaced with 787/350 and those aircraft can then replace 763. The 359 can eventually replace the 772 on longer routes and the 78J would be a good fit on shorter routes. Also, the MoM can find a place here but still being a paper airplane can be left out of the conversation at this time. My 2¢...


No you will never see an A330-900 at AA.

And I dont think the A350 will make it either, they have deferred the order twice now.
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 684
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sun May 21, 2017 3:07 am

With so many 788s at AA, I don't think the A330-900neo has a place at AA, because it's a heavier plane and with shorter range (it can't do the routes across the Pacific currently performed out of LAX). The Boeing 787 is far more versatile in this regard.

trex8 wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:

I think that's a great idea. Is it possible to get a 242T A330-300 with Trent 700 engines?


except for DL I think every other 242t A333 operator have Rollers.


If I'm not mistaken, Turkish Airlines has some 242t A330-303s and Aer Lingus has two 242t A330-302s. (TK had started its orders with RR A333s but then switched to GE A333s.)
 
mig17
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sun May 21, 2017 9:16 am

Boeing778X wrote:
mig17 wrote:
We may even see the 777-9 at AA at some point.

I doubt that.

Please elaborate. A 777-300ER/-9 fleet at AA would work well. You know AA can't do what they do with just 787s and A350s.

Not yet for sure, but in 202x, AA will have to replace the 772. While the 777-9X can replace the 77W, I don't see the -8X replacing the 772. And the 787-10 can't do it alone either. So if AA ever have the 777X, it will be like today with the 77W, around "only" 20 planes and it will not be part of the 772 replacement plan.

A combo 787-10, A350-900 and A350-1000 can replace the entire 777 fleet between 2024 and 203x. Add the 787-8 and -9 and you can replace every widebody in AA's fleet.

So yes, right now AA like every US airline, is trying to slow down the arrival of new planes because of the good economic context. That is why we see deferals. But in the end, A350 is still on order and the 777X doesn't seem to make sense for AA.
 
User avatar
LA704
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 10:04 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Sun May 21, 2017 10:14 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
With so many 788s at AA, I don't think the A330-900neo has a place at AA, because it's a heavier plane and with shorter range (it can't do the routes across the Pacific currently performed out of LAX). The Boeing 787 is far more versatile in this regard.

trex8 wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:

I think that's a great idea. Is it possible to get a 242T A330-300 with Trent 700 engines?


except for DL I think every other 242t A333 operator have Rollers.


If I'm not mistaken, Turkish Airlines has some 242t A330-303s and Aer Lingus has two 242t A330-302s. (TK had started its orders with RR A333s but then switched to GE A333s.)


Add IB to that list. But the point stands, the T700 is pretty much standard on higher rated 330's.
318 319 320 321 332 343 722 731 732 735 73G 742 744 752 762 763 77W M11
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Mon May 22, 2017 3:56 pm

LA704 wrote:
aemoreira1981 wrote:
With so many 788s at AA, I don't think the A330-900neo has a place at AA, because it's a heavier plane and with shorter range (it can't do the routes across the Pacific currently performed out of LAX). The Boeing 787 is far more versatile in this regard.

trex8 wrote:

except for DL I think every other 242t A333 operator have Rollers.


If I'm not mistaken, Turkish Airlines has some 242t A330-303s and Aer Lingus has two 242t A330-302s. (TK had started its orders with RR A333s but then switched to GE A333s.)


Add IB to that list. But the point stands, the T700 is pretty much standard on higher rated 330's.


I'm assuming Trent 700s would be chosen, if AA were to take the 242t A333. I believe they would have little issue with the CF6 option too.

mig17 wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
mig17 wrote:
I doubt that.

Please elaborate. A 777-300ER/-9 fleet at AA would work well. You know AA can't do what they do with just 787s and A350s.

Not yet for sure, but in 202x, AA will have to replace the 772. While the 777-9X can replace the 77W, I don't see the -8X replacing the 772. And the 787-10 can't do it alone either. So if AA ever have the 777X, it will be like today with the 77W, around "only" 20 planes and it will not be part of the 772 replacement plan.

A combo 787-10, A350-900 and A350-1000 can replace the entire 777 fleet between 2024 and 203x. Add the 787-8 and -9 and you can replace every widebody in AA's fleet.

So yes, right now AA like every US airline, is trying to slow down the arrival of new planes because of the good economic context. That is why we see deferals. But in the end, A350 is still on order and the 777X doesn't seem to make sense for AA.


The 777X makes perfect sense for AA. We are a premium airline with premium destinations, premium products, premium services, and the 777 is our premium plane. What replaces the 77E is up for debate, but the 777 is not going anywhere, and the addition of 15-20x 777-9s would suit the airline well. We don't need the performance of the -8. And I definitely cannot see the A350-1000 replacing anything in that size bracket.

I don't see AA ordering the 787-10 at this point in time, and I think additional 787-9s are inevitable.

AA hasn't deferred an aircraft like they have for the A350. The first ones were supposed to arrive this year originally, and now they supposedly don't arrive until next decade. And in addition to that, it would be another oddball aircraft that AA didn't order to begin with.

The A330 is oddball too, but at least it's an established type at AA, hence why we have this thread. I've heard nothing about training for the A350 at AA, and the recent 1Q State of the Airline meeting did little to raise that hope.

The 787-9 replaces the 77Es perfectly, and I mean perfectly, but so would the A350-900. The addition of the -1000 would add to the flexibility of the fleet.

It will be interesting to see what Boing and Airbus do for an MoM aircraft. AA would almost certainly order the type and would have the ability to remove the 757, 767 and possibility even the A330-200.

If that plays well, a 787/A350/777 fleet is perfect.

If not, a fleet of 788/789/77W/779 works well, and then convert the A350 order to the A333HGW or A339 to compliment the A332 for East Coast-Europe/South America.
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
superjeff
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:14 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Mon May 22, 2017 4:10 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The problem the A350 has at AA is that it's an entirely new type to integrate.


I'm not sure why you describe that as "a problem". A big carrier like AA can perfectly handle the introduction of a new type. Just like they introduced the 787 at one point.


That's true. However, AA never ordered the A350, US did, and I'm not sure AA would have ordered the type on their own, given the amount of 787s they have on order and access to.


Except, of course, that the US Management that ordered the A350 is now the AA Management . . ..
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 24645
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Mon May 22, 2017 4:18 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
The 777X makes perfect sense for AA. We are a premium airline with premium destinations, premium products, premium services, and the 777 is our premium plane. What replaces the 77E is up for debate, but the 777 is not going anywhere, and the addition of 15-20x 777-9s would suit the airline well. We don't need the performance of the -8. And I definitely cannot see the A350-1000 replacing anything in that size bracket.


As the 77W is still brand new at AA and given the current market slowdown, AA doesn't need 777X metal for at least another 10 years or so. And who knows how the market will be over 10 years.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Mon May 22, 2017 7:48 pm

superjeff wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:

I'm not sure why you describe that as "a problem". A big carrier like AA can perfectly handle the introduction of a new type. Just like they introduced the 787 at one point.


That's true. However, AA never ordered the A350, US did, and I'm not sure AA would have ordered the type on their own, given the amount of 787s they have on order and access to.


Except, of course, that the US Management that ordered the A350 is now the AA Management . . ..


Yes, true. Which makes the thread all the more interesting. It's no secret Doug is a big Airbus guy.

KarelXWB wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The 777X makes perfect sense for AA. We are a premium airline with premium destinations, premium products, premium services, and the 777 is our premium plane. What replaces the 77E is up for debate, but the 777 is not going anywhere, and the addition of 15-20x 777-9s would suit the airline well. We don't need the performance of the -8. And I definitely cannot see the A350-1000 replacing anything in that size bracket.


As the 77W is still brand new at AA and given the current market slowdown, AA doesn't need 777X metal for at least another 10 years or so. And who knows how the market will be over 10 years.


If fuel is higher and some expansion is happening, I can definitely see it happening. Granted I'm not saying they'll order it tomorrow, next decade at the earliest. A 77W/779 fleet isn't a bad move, especially for an airline like AA.
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28
 
kitplane01
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:58 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Tue May 23, 2017 5:47 am

Boeing778X wrote:
The 777X makes perfect sense for AA. We are a premium airline with premium destinations, premium products, premium services, and the 777 is our premium plane.



I'm not sure I understand this.

As a customer I just want some leg room, a choice of beverage and a reasonably large overhead bin.

I don't care if it's a 777X or an MD-11. And why would I?

Now as a plane spotter ...
 
LPSHobby
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:14 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Tue May 23, 2017 11:42 am

I just want to know when the jurassic 763 that flies to CNF will be replaced! They are terrible, tube TVs, no IFEs, broken seats and always been delayed due to tech problems
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 24645
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Tue May 23, 2017 12:18 pm

Boeing778X wrote:
The 777 is going nowhere anytime soon. The 77Es will get replaced with the 789, and the A359 assuming the orders hold up, but the 77Ws are here to stay. We may even see the 777-9 at AA at some point.


Still, the 777-200ER fleet will need to be replaced sooner or later. AA could just postpone A350 deliveries until the 777-200ER fleet comes up for retirement next decade.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 10051
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Tue May 23, 2017 1:11 pm

kitplane01 wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The 777X makes perfect sense for AA. We are a premium airline with premium destinations, premium products, premium services, and the 777 is our premium plane.



I'm not sure I understand this.

As a customer I just want some leg room, a choice of beverage and a reasonably large overhead bin.

I don't care if it's a 777X or an MD-11. And why would I?

Now as a plane spotter ...


I know, an MD11 any day. https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3876/15025102985_62d928b854_c.jpg

back on topic, for an airline that heavily invested in 787-9, that are doing fine, nearly identical A339 seems highly unlikely a smart idea.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Topic Author
Posts: 3041
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: Airbus A330-900neo At AA: A Good Fit?

Tue May 23, 2017 3:29 pm

LPSHobby wrote:
I just want to know when the jurassic 763 that flies to CNF will be replaced! They are terrible, tube TVs, no IFEs, broken seats and always been delayed due to tech problems


Well, the youngest 17x are retained beyond 2018, which means 14x will be retired in the immediate future. AA reiterated that the 767 is still essential to the fleet in the mid term, but the retirement of the type is inevitable.

Especially if an A/B MoM war gets underway in the next year or so, the 767s will be gone completely by the early 2020s. The A330neo would also be perfect for some 767 missions.

KarelXWB wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The 777 is going nowhere anytime soon. The 77Es will get replaced with the 789, and the A359 assuming the orders hold up, but the 77Ws are here to stay. We may even see the 777-9 at AA at some point.


Still, the 777-200ER fleet will need to be replaced sooner or later. AA could just postpone A350 deliveries until the 777-200ER fleet comes up for retirement next decade.


I would argue that the 787-9 in its current configuration is a rather great 77E replacement in itself. AA, as I understand, has a sizeable number of options for the 787.

The A350-900 is an ideal aircraft to replace the 77E as well. The postponement of the A350 order announced the other day is not the first however, and the deferment is a pretty big one too.

keesje wrote:
kitplane01 wrote:
Boeing778X wrote:
The 777X makes perfect sense for AA. We are a premium airline with premium destinations, premium products, premium services, and the 777 is our premium plane.



I'm not sure I understand this.

As a customer I just want some leg room, a choice of beverage and a reasonably large overhead bin.

I don't care if it's a 777X or an MD-11. And why would I?

Now as a plane spotter ...


I know, an MD11 any day. https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3876/15025102985_62d928b854_c.jpg

back on topic, for an airline that heavily invested in 787-9, that are doing fine, nearly identical A339 seems highly unlikely a smart idea.


Never got to ride on an MD-11. Guess I better go to FedEx :(

The A339, as stated, would be a good option for East Coast (PHL, CLT and MIA) to Europe and South America.
Been On: 722 733 73G 738, 752, 763, 77W, 788, A319, A320, A321, E140, E145, E45X, E175, C150, C172, C208, Q400, CRJ7, CRJ9, MD82, MD83, PA28

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos