NYC777
Posts: 5076
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:43 am

Sounds to me like that both parties have an agreement. If that's so when can AC finally have a new deal with Boeing? I assume that the numbers ordered won't change significantly?
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
9252fly
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 7:19 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:44 am

This has been expected,but it's "BIG" news!
 
aseem
Posts: 1971
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 12:39 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:46 am

so do they still retain the slots!! i think they have it for Mar 06..
Vive Le YYZ!!
VT-ASJ
ala re ala, VT-ALA ala
 
chrisa330
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 10:24 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:47 am

No - it's more like an agreement has been made on how to resolve 2 issues:

1) Mediation will bring the seniority issues related to the merger to a final resolution

2) They have agreed to a binding arbitration process for resolving issues related to the acquisition of Boeing (B777 and B787) aircraft.

Air Canada in their release notes that subject to a suitable outcome, they will re-engage Boeing to renegotiate the order
 
sebring
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:08 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:53 am

The 2006 deliveries have been lost, and will have to be rescheduled, assuming AC doesn't alter the number of 777 aircraft it wants. I was told that Boeing will ensure that AC has enough 2006 lift - presumably used aircraft, though not 777-300ERs because there aren't any on the market - to meet AC's 2006 capacity expansion needs.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:54 am

I think these issues will be solved and AC will probably be able to get the same deals as before, but will lose some of their slots, especially for the 777..but this is BIG news.....would love to see the 777's in AC colours.. yes 
"Up the Irons!"
 
aseem
Posts: 1971
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 12:39 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 3:58 am

Quoting Sebring (Reply 5):
The 2006 deliveries have been lost

first of all it is sad Sad 2006 is just round the corner. I think I discussed with you, but not sure. But who got those slots?
rgds
VT-ASJ
ala re ala, VT-ALA ala
 
Hamlet69
Posts: 2470
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2000 2:45 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:23 am

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 1):
Sounds to me like that both parties have an agreement.

Not yet. The announcement is that they have a plan on how to work out an agreement, both on the seniority issue, and the Boeing purchase.

Quoting Aseem (Reply 7):
But who got those slots?

AC had two confirmed 2006 slots, and one that was to be firmed up right after the pilot's vote. Those slots were simply used to move other customers up in line. In other words, no one really "got" the AC slots, they simply moved ahead a little. If you were looking for actual l/n, I believe AF is now in the first slot (3/06), and I believe ANZ is now in the 6/06 slot.


Regards,

Hamlet69
Honor the warriors, not the war.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8969
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:27 am

Maybe some of the leasing companies have some aircraft still available?

Good news; I knew it was only a matter of time before a deal was done, but nonetheless, I'm glad this will go ahead.
 
User avatar
USAF336TFS
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:29 am

This is indeed good news for both Boeing and AC. With the troubles that NW is in, those 787 slots could be quickly taken by AC, should NW liquidate or cancel it's order, My hope is that both AC & NW get the 787.

Regards,
Sal
336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
 
TPASXM787
Posts: 1667
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:31 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:44 am

Can't wait to see a mint green 777...hmmm....should be interesting.

Kind of figured this would be the outcome all along, as usual the union had to screw things up instead of working with the airline behind the scenes.
This is the Last Stop.
 
robsawatsky
Posts: 477
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:07 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:46 am

The good news is that the company-union (aircraft type/rates) and intra-union (seniority) issues have been recognized by both parties as separate issues. The 1st will get resolved because it is binding arbitration. The 2nd is mediation, which I will not speculate on the probability of success given that it would have to throw a previously aribitrated decision.
 
aseem
Posts: 1971
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 12:39 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:50 am

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 8):
I believe AF is now in the first slot (3/06), and I believe ANZ is now in the 6/06 slot.

are you talking about B773 slots? AF and ANZ never ordered B772LRs!!
rgds
VT-ASJ
ala re ala, VT-ALA ala
 
chrisa330
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 10:24 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:51 am

Quoting Aseem (Reply 13):
are you talking about B773 slots? AF and ANZ never ordered B772LRs!!
rgds
VT-ASJ

ANZ hasn't ordered B773s either.
 
N60659
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:54 am

Quoting Aseem (Reply 13):
are you talking about B773 slots? AF and ANZ never ordered B772LRs!!



Quoting ChrisA330 (Reply 14):
ANZ hasn't ordered B773s either.

It doesn't matter. All the 777s come off the same final assembly line(s) in Everett.

-N60659
Nec Dextrorsum Nec Sinistrorsum
 
aseem
Posts: 1971
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 12:39 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:56 am

Quoting N60659 (Reply 15):

gotcha!!!
ala re ala, VT-ALA ala
 
chrisa330
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 1999 10:24 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:56 am

Quoting N60659 (Reply 15):
It doesn't matter. All the 777s come off the same final assembly line(s) in Everett.

Thanks for the correction!
 
krisyyz
Posts: 1266
Joined: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:04 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 7:26 am

Press release from Air Canada:


http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/23/c3492.html

"Air Canada would then re-engage Boeing to conclude an agreement on the acquisition of 777 and 787 aircraft."

Music to my ears, can't wait !

Krisyyz
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 2475
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 11:45 am

Encouraging news indeed. Now if Boeing and their machinists can just resolve their differences, all will be right in the aviation world again.......
 
Boeing777LR
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:40 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 12:48 pm

Can'T wait to fly in the new 787 / 777's when would their 787's slots be ???
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9864
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 1:06 pm

Quoting ER757 (Reply 19):
Now if Boeing and their machinists can just resolve their differences

According to BCAinfosystems (i think thats the member) he said that the BCA chief said to not expect a resolution to the strike for atleast 5 months (February/March). If only Boeing would get a court order demanding the strikers return to work and then work on a new contract.
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
The777Man
Posts: 5926
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 1999 4:54 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:47 pm

Great news ! I was just wondering how things were coming along. It seems like AC is almost ready to talk to Boeing again regarding this. Hopefully AC will finalize this order before Christmas and perhaps AI, QR and QF will have placed firm orders for the 777 then as well.... Smile

The777Man
Boeing 777s flown: UA, TG, KE, BA, CX, NH, JD, JL, CZ, SQ, EK, NG, CO, AF, SV, KU, DL, AA, MH, OZ, CA, MS, SU, LY, RG, PE, AZ, KL, VN, PK, EY, NZ, AM, BR, AC, DT, UU, OS, AI, 9W, KQ, QR, VA, JJ, ET, TK, PR, BG, T5, CI, MU and LX.. Further to fly.. LH 777
 
777ER
Crew
Posts: 9864
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 5:04 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:48 pm

Quoting The777Man (Reply 22):
Hopefully AC will finalize this order before Christmas and perhaps AI, QR and QF will have placed firm orders for the 777 then as well....

Lets start hoping then  Smile
Head Forum Moderator
moderators@airliners.net for all Moderator contact
 
gmonney
Posts: 2076
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2001 2:59 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 10:13 pm

This is all fine and dandy, but is AC tring to own 20 of every aircraft on the market, I am just thinking of the MX costs and the training time need for the current employees... I know that they are not happy with A, but will the costs of B be too great?

G
Drive it like you stole it!
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 10:31 pm

Quoting Gmonney (Reply 24):
This is all fine and dandy, but is AC tring to own 20 of every aircraft on the market, I am just thinking of the MX costs and the training time need for the current employees... I know that they are not happy with A, but will the costs of B be too great?

The original AC plan was to replace the 330/340 fleet with 777/787. The 767 fleet would be the last to be replaced. So, AC want to be effectively Airbus short haul and Boeing long haul.
 
Cruiser
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sat Sep 24, 2005 11:05 pm

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 25):
The original AC plan was to replace the 330/340 fleet with 777/787. The 767 fleet would be the last to be replaced. So, AC want to be effectively Airbus short haul and Boeing long haul.

The 787/777 would be perfect for Air Canada, and would eliminate the A340's, which from all indications, AC are not happy with performance wise. Don't take this as an anti-Airbus statement, but the 777 will be much better suited to the routing which they wish to perform, and are currently serving.

It should also be noted that the Airbus A320's (not 319's or 321's) have an AVERAGE age of 12.5 years while the 767's (all series) have an average age of 14.1 years. As the E190's start coming online, the E190's are going to be taking on more 319 routes, and the 319's will be taking over some 320 routes. Thus, AC will end up sending back/selling approximately 30 A320's.

When this order for the Boeings goes through, AC will have an extremely streamlined fleet. Since the merger with Canadi>n, the fleet has been a mess. This will streamline things and ultimately get rid of the maintenance hogs (read A345's and 767's which are just getting old) and the gas guzzlers.

James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
milan320
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 2:25 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sun Sep 25, 2005 6:15 pm

Quoting Gmonney (Reply 24):
I know that they are not happy with A, but will the costs of B be too great?

You don't need to generalize so much ... who said that they're not happy with all of the Airbus types that they have in their fleet?
Common rumor is that their A345s are lemons ... surely these don't represent all of the Airbus' in ACs fleet nor does that imply that AC is unhappy with their other Airbus' types (namely the Airbus narrowbodies).
-Milan320
I accept bribes ... :-)
 
Cruiser
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sun Sep 25, 2005 9:24 pm

Quoting Milan320 (Reply 27):
Common rumor is that their A345s are lemons ... surely these don't represent all of the Airbus' in ACs fleet nor does that imply that AC is unhappy with their other Airbus' types (namely the Airbus narrowbodies).

They are not happy with the A343 and A345. Out of the 20 Airbus Widebodies, this would mean that they are not satisfied with 12 planes. If you do the math, that is 60% of their widebodies they are not happy with.

To put it another way, they are only happy with 40% of their current Airbus Widebodies. Of course, the narrowbodies are another ball of wax. They are happy with them, except that the A320's are getting old. About 30 of them will be going as the E190's come online.

I personally have not heard of one airline which was unhappy with the 777. I doubt AC will be! Am I anti-airbus, I don't think so. I am a business student, and I look at the business case. The 777 is one generation ahead of the A340, and it shows in every way!

James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
accargo
Posts: 576
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:19 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Sun Sep 25, 2005 11:32 pm

Lot's and lot's of rumours about how unhappy AC is with it's Airbus widebodies. Too bad there is not a lot of truth in the rumours. The 330's are excellent workhorses, the 340-500's have had problems but interestingly enough the dispatch reliability has been close to 100% for the last six weeks. Hard to do if there lemons. The other 340's have operated just as well. AC will order Boeing now that the steps are in place to resolve the pilot issues, it wants Boeing for a lot or reasons, one huge reason is fuel costs, and not so much because they are unhappy with the Airbus widebodies they have.
 
Cruiser
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:18 am

Quoting Accargo (Reply 29):
Too bad there is not a lot of truth in the rumours. The 330's are excellent workhorses, the 340-500's have had problems but interestingly enough the dispatch reliability has been close to 100% for the last six weeks.

True, but the 2 A345's have a dedicated maintenance team. I know of no other airplanes which would require such heavy maintenance to keep them at an almost 100% dispatch reliability. Not only that, but it is easy to keep 2 planes at a 100% dispatch reliability than say 45 767's. Just a thought.

I will agree that the 330's are workhorses, which has been said time and time again.

Personally I see that they are unhappy with the A343's because of the fuel costs. Not only that, but they are not able to carry the same amount of frieght as the 777. If freight consistantly gets bumped due to weight restrictions on a particular aircraft, then it would certainly make me unhappy as management. Freight is profit.

Quoting Accargo (Reply 29):
it wants Boeing for a lot or reasons, one huge reason is fuel costs, and not so much because they are unhappy with the Airbus widebodies they have.

If there are reasons why they want to change, then there must be a reason for it. Hence, if you have a reason for changing, then you are not completely satisfied. Thus, we can conclude that AC is not completely satisfied (aka unhappy) with the Airbus widebodies (barring the A330).


Again, just my thoughts/opinions. I don't actually work for AC, but I do subscribe to a lot of AC forums and I do talk to AC employees.

I am going to leave it here so that this does not become an Airbus vs. Boeing debate. It isn't, and never should be.

[Edited 2005-09-25 17:23:48]
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
accargo
Posts: 576
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:19 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:40 am

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 30):
Personally I see that they are unhappy with the A343's because of the fuel costs. Not only that, but they are not able to carry the same amount of frieght as the 777. If freight consistantly gets bumped due to weight restrictions on a particular aircraft, then it would certainly make me unhappy as management. Freight is profit.

The fuel issue has only surfaced recently, it was much less a factor when AC acquired all it's 340's. I am not sure what variants of the 777 were around when AC acquired the 340's but would those variants be able to fly without weight restrictions to the edge of it's range. AC has problems on it's YYZ-DEL flights at times of the year, because it chooses to fly non-stop and it knows that there will be loss of revenue due to those weight restrictions. Most other routes that the 340's operate don't have issues with weight restrictions unless there are other factors at play. We have had problems on some routes with the 767 and weight restrictions, so it's isn't an Airbus only issue. It's a trade off that AC management makes in order to offer the routes and service it decides on.

I don't go for any of this A vs B crap myself, each has it's own pro's and con's. I'm happy to see shiny new acft arriving from whichever factory they come from  Smile . (As long as some freighters come along too Big grin )
 
Cruiser
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 2:08 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:47 am

Quoting Accargo (Reply 31):
(As long as some freighters come along too )

Hey come on, they give YYZ some variety for the spotters. We would not get MD-11s or as many DC-10s.  Big grin

James
Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
 
sebring
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:08 am

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:28 am

Quote:
True, but the 2 A345's have a dedicated maintenance team. I know of no other airplanes which would require such heavy maintenance to keep them at an almost 100% dispatch reliability. Not only that, but it is easy to keep 2 planes at a 100% dispatch reliability than say 45 767's. Just a thought.

I have no indication that that is currently the case, if it ever was.

Quote:
Personally I see that they are unhappy with the A343's because of the fuel costs. Not only that, but they are not able to carry the same amount of frieght as the 777. If freight consistantly gets bumped due to weight restrictions on a particular aircraft, then it would certainly make me unhappy as management. Freight is profit.

I don't see that myself. I think you have a very imaginative crystal ball. Fuel is not only a function of the aircraft design, but also the routing, and the four-engine aircraft does allow AC to take more direct routings in some instances. AC has packed over 35 tonnes of freight on a 340 when passenger loads were lighter, which, on the transatlantic, occurs in a month like November when cargo demand and yields are highest.

Quote:

Quoting Accargo (Reply 29):
it wants Boeing for a lot or reasons, one huge reason is fuel costs, and not so much because they are unhappy with the Airbus widebodies they have.

If there are reasons why they want to change, then there must be a reason for it. Hence, if you have a reason for changing, then you are not completely satisfied. Thus, we can conclude that AC is not completely satisfied (aka unhappy) with the Airbus widebodies (barring the A330).

Quote wrong. The 340s are considered good planes. This is not about judging the current fleet so much as it is the need to build the optimum future fleet. AC determined that if it could sweep out all the variants it has now in the widebody fleet: 762, 763-PW, 763-GE, 330, 343 (both regular and higher gross weight), 345 and standardize with just two or three types (772-LR, 773, 787-8, 787-9), it will gain a lot of synergies. The 763 fleet also includes several different cabin configurations which can create additional passenger issues.

First of all, all of the aforementionned Boeing planes will have at least 14 hours full pax load flying range. The 762 and A330 do not, so you cannot use them interchangeably with longer range planes in AC's current fleet. For example, if a 340 scheduled to fly Vancouver-Hong Kong goes mechanical, and AC has a London-Vancouver A330 coming in, it cannot sub the 330 for the 340, even though that might be far and away the most practical solution in terms of crew cost and minimizing passenger delays. Nor if a 340 craps out on the YYZ-DEL nonstop can you sub in a 763 - not enough range. But if every plane can do 14 hours - right now, only the 343s and 345s can do 14 hours with a compensatory payload - then you gain considerable scheduling flexibility and significant cost savings.

From a fuel perspective the 773 and 772LR are very nice planes, but are not radically better than the 340. It's still 1990s technology upated. From AC's perspective, what drove the original deal was the 787 and the fact Airbus doesn't have a pure 767 replacement aircraft. In the final technical analysis, this is what got the contract for Boeing. And since AC wanted the benefits of a one-manufacturer fleet with standardize range and cabin interiors, that got Boeing the front end of the deal (the 777s). If Airbus had focussed the 350 as a A310 replacement instead of as an A330/340 replacement, there is a very good chance AC would have gone that way because Airbus' financial terms were a whole lot better than Boeing, and I have that from an irreproachable AC source.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Mon Sep 26, 2005 2:12 am

Quoting Sebring (Reply 33):
Airbus' financial terms were a whole lot better than Boeing, and I have that from an irreproachable AC source.

thanks for the information Sebring..but what I don't understand is that I have read countless amounts of time that Airbus offers bettere financing than Boeing..how can that be on such a consistent basis?  confused 
"Up the Irons!"
 
Olympus69
Posts: 1571
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2002 11:21 pm

RE: Air Canada - Progress Made On 777/787 Issues

Mon Sep 26, 2005 2:53 am

Quoting Cruiser (Reply 30):
If there are reasons why they want to change, then there must be a reason for it.

Duh?