727LOVER
Topic Author
Posts: 6598
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 2:53 am

America West has ordered the A318, but these other A320 family carriers have not! Why not?
I feel woozy....what did you put in that Pudding Pop?
 
Reggaebird
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 1999 7:43 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 2:55 am

Because it is overweight and not economical maybe.
 
ptica2000
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2000 1:48 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 3:07 am

''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...

Nejc
 
DCA-ROCguy
Posts: 3890
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 3:15 am

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.

Jim
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
 
N79969
Posts: 6605
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2002 1:43 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 3:17 am

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.
 
DCA-ROCguy
Posts: 3890
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2000 5:03 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 3:29 am

"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.

Jim
Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
 
flydeltasjets
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2001 4:14 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 3:37 am

Jim,

You forgot to say "cartel"!
 
redngold
Posts: 6673
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 3:52 am

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.

redngold
Up, up and away!
 
cba
Posts: 4228
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2000 2:02 pm

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 4:45 am

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.
 
SegmentKing
Posts: 3224
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2000 7:16 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 5:00 am

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

-n
~ ~ ~ ~ pRoFeSsIoNaL hUrRiCaNe DoDgEr ~ ~ ~ ~
 
jmacias34
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 10:50 am

RE: United, US Airways, Northwest...Why No A318?

Fri May 31, 2002 5:15 pm

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?

Who is online