User avatar
United787
Topic Author
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 2:31 am

Can someone give me a history of why and when United Airlines choose the A320 family for the narrow body considering they already had the 737-300 and 737-500 in their fleet? Was it before Boeing had offered the 737NG family? If so, wasn't it assumed that Boeing would be coming out with a next generation?

I assume this was a blow to Boeing. Was this a case of Boeing sales falling asleep on the job, like when the lost the JetBlue sale?
 
dalb777
Posts: 1698
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 9:35 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 2:35 am

Quoting United787 (Thread starter):
Was it before Boeing had offered the 737NG family?

Correct, they probably needed new planes and couldn't wait for Boeing.
Geaux Tigers! Geaux Hornets! Geaux Saints! WHO DAT!!!
 
uadc8contrail
Posts: 1636
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 1:23 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 2:36 am

wolf was running ual at the time and from what i remember, boeing couldnt come up with a 37ng quick enough and airbus was pratically giving away the a320..im sure there were other reasons but those 2 come to mind..
bus driver.......move that bus:)
 
User avatar
United787
Topic Author
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 2:46 am

Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 2):
wolf was running ual at the time and from what i remember, boeing couldnt come up with a 37ng quick enough and airbus was pratically giving away the a320..im sure there were other reasons but those 2 come to mind..

Thank you,

So I assume UA got a really good deal on them although we will never know. So, does the UA order that is still on the books for 23 A319 and 19 A320 part of the original order at that assumed good price? Are their additional options that are also at that assumed good price? What year was that?

Also, I noticed that on the Airbus website, UA took delivery of one more A320 than it currently operates, what happened to the mystery A320?

So many questions, so many experts, so much time...
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 2:50 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 3):
Also, I noticed that on the Airbus website, UA took delivery of one more A320 than it currently operates, what happened to the mystery A320?

If you look at the Airbus Orders and Deliveries list, there are a lot of operators who took delivery of fewer aircraft than they operate - this is most likely to do that they bought the aircraft off someone else (see FlyI's aircraft) or off a lessor.
 
USPIT10L
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:24 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 3:12 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 3):
So I assume UA got a really good deal on them although we will never know.

Yes, so did US Airways. I personally think they are better than 737s, much quieter and a better ride overall. But operationally, it may bite both carriers as things that break on Airbii don't break on Boeing, and that's what UA and US mechanics were trained on. I've worked with ex-mechanics and ex-utility workers for both airlines.
It's a Great Day for Hockey!
 
phllax
Posts: 333
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:53 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:37 am

This topic was discussed last week.

In a nutshell, the 400 didn't have the range to do transcon without an extra fuel tank and therefore less cargo space. The 320 could and there were ample delivery positions available.
 
flyboy7974
Posts: 1210
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2003 4:35 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:42 am

b/s, ua bought airbus simply to get added rights through europe. It was all politics to get better flight slots, gates and terminal space. That's all
 
USPIT10L
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:24 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:45 am

Quoting Flyboy7974 (Reply 7):
b/s, ua bought airbus simply to get added rights through europe. It was all politics to get better flight slots, gates and terminal space. That's all

UA bought PA's routes to LHR and CDG. That included tag-ons to various points in Europe. Airbus had nothing to do with it.
It's a Great Day for Hockey!
 
ken4556
Posts: 152
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 1999 5:28 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:48 am

If I remembering correctly, Airbus made a great deal with United and a return guarentte, if after two years, they could return them if they did not like them or need them. That was in the early 90's when times were not too good.

After Boeing lost the order, the 737NG happened as they knew that the existing 737-300/400/500 had range issues.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4763
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:49 am

Quoting Flyboy7974 (Reply 7):
b/s, ua bought airbus simply to get added rights through europe. It was all politics to get better flight slots, gates and terminal space. That's all

I have no doubt that you're going to back that up with something other than hot air.

God forbid anyone would ever buy an Airbus because it was just the best plane for them at the time  Yeah sure
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9728
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:14 am

Some interesting data from Operational Cost's Of Various Airliners (by Worldjet777 Dec 29 2005 in Tech Ops)

Average total block hour costs per hour across all the USA fleets for
738 $2,859
320 $2,516

Average total cost of ownership per month per aircraft
738 $179,886
320 $163,357

Average fuel burn gal per hour
738 805
320 804

Total Average Aircraft Operating Cost Per ASM
738 4.8
320 4.3

The 738 does provide on average an additional 2 seats per aircraft for the extra cost.

Data based on Form 41 returns.

Sound decision in hindsight.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:20 am

The reality is that Boeing had no plane to sell them. The first 737NG wouldn't fly for more than 6 years after UA received their first A320.

United has placed several large followon orders for 320s and 319s, including a 45 airplane deal in, I think, 1999.

N
 
PlaneHunter
Posts: 6512
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:17 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:22 am

Quoting Flyboy7974 (Reply 7):
b/s, ua bought airbus simply to get added rights through europe. It was all politics to get better flight slots, gates and terminal space. That's all

It may be "all" in your opinion, but not in reality.


PH
Nothing's worse than flying the same reg twice!
 
CM767
Posts: 448
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:58 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:30 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):
The 738 does provide on average an additional 2 seats per aircraft for the extra cost.

Zeke, if you compare both in all economy, would you have only 2 extra seats for the 800?

I believe that the 800 is larger than the 320.
But The Best Thing God Has Created Is A New Day
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9728
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:35 am

Quoting CM767 (Reply 14):
Zeke, if you compare both in all economy, would you have only 2 extra seats for the 800?

I believe that the 800 is larger than the 320.

That is historical data based upon how the airlines are actually operating them, and how much its is costing them to do it.

It is not glossed up manufacturers data.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
United787
Topic Author
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:37 am

Quoting Phllax (Reply 6):
This topic was discussed last week.

Really? I did a search and couldn't find any topic relating to the A320 and United. If it was discussed it must have been off topic on another thread. Do you have a link to the thread?
 
keesje
Posts: 8588
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:42 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):
Some interesting data from Operational Cost's Of Various Airliners

Zeke, you get flamed for bringing this up. It has to be price..

Anyway, lets add better take-off / landing performance, comfort & 15-25% longer maintenance intervals.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:43 am

There is no appreciable difference in the take off/landing performance of the aircraft.

N
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:45 am

UA's decision to go with the A32X family was a surprise for many, as they were a long time 737 operator......UA launched the 732 and operated a large 735/733 fleet. What happened?

1. UA was looking for an aircraft in the 150 pax category for expansion and also to begin the relplacement of UA's large 727 fleet.

2. The A320 had more capacity than the 734, the largest variant of the 737 2nd generation family.

3. The A320 could fly most transcon routes, the 734 did not have the range.

4. Airbus offered UA a great deal on the A320 - for obvious reasons, Airbus very much wanted to place its aircraft with UA, not only was UA the second largest US carrier, they were a big 737 operator.

5. UA also wanted to gain experience with the newer technologies offered by the A320 (such as fly-by-wire).......I remember reading an interview given by a member of the UA management saying that the A320 was considered a transition aircraft by UA and the experience gained with the type would be valuable in th future for the introduction of new types, including the 772.

6. UA placed follow on orders for the A320, and also the A319........smaller aircraft with more range were interesting for UA as their route system developed and moved more and more to a multi-hub system.

Remember, this was a content between the A32X and SECOND GEN 737.....and when comparing those two types, the A32X family did offer certain advantages. Of course, Boeing went on to develop the 737NG family which competes head-to-head with the A32X.....many claim that UA's decision to acquire the A320 was one of the major reasons for Boeing to start the development of the 737NG.
 
JRadier
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 11:36 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:47 am

First of all, I don't care wich aircraft is better, just getting some conclusions and thoughts here, so replies are welcomed, but only if they have something usefull  Smile.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):

Average total block hour costs per hour across all the USA fleets for
738 $2,859
320 $2,516

at 2 seats extra that would be $175 per hour per seat extra, wich with todays ticket prices is pretty hard to get from pax (especially if it is economy).

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):
Average total cost of ownership per month per aircraft
738 $179,886
320 $163,357

This is where it really hurts, a $16.5k extra a month, that is around $250 per extra seat per day (bit more, but close enough), on top of the allready mentioned $175. Let's say the aircraft flies 10 hrs per day (wich is pretty ok I guess) that would cost a 738 operator $200 per seat (for the 2 extra hours) per hour. Good luck finding paying customers for that day in day out.

I understand there are a lot more variables to this, but I recon this is quite close.
For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
 
User avatar
United787
Topic Author
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 8:14 am

Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 2):
wolf was running ual at the time and from what i remember, boeing couldnt come up with a 37ng quick enough and airbus was pratically giving away the a320..im sure there were other reasons but those 2 come to mind..



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 12):
The reality is that Boeing had no plane to sell them. The first 737NG wouldn't fly for more than 6 years after UA received their first A320.

United has placed several large followon orders for 320s and 319s, including a 45 airplane deal in, I think, 1999.



Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 19):
UA's decision to go with the A32X family was a surprise for many, as they were a long time 737 operator......UA launched the 732 and operated a large 735/733 fleet. What happened?

1. UA was looking for an aircraft in the 150 pax category for expansion and also to begin the relplacement of UA's large 727 fleet.

2. The A320 had more capacity than the 734, the largest variant of the 737 2nd generation family.

3. The A320 could fly most transcon routes, the 734 did not have the range.

4. Airbus offered UA a great deal on the A320 - for obvious reasons, Airbus very much wanted to place its aircraft with UA, not only was UA the second largest US carrier, they were a big 737 operator.

5. UA also wanted to gain experience with the newer technologies offered by the A320 (such as fly-by-wire).......I remember reading an interview given by a member of the UA management saying that the A320 was considered a transition aircraft by UA and the experience gained with the type would be valuable in th future for the introduction of new types, including the 772.

6. UA placed follow on orders for the A320, and also the A319........smaller aircraft with more range were interesting for UA as their route system developed and moved more and more to a multi-hub system.

Remember, this was a content between the A32X and SECOND GEN 737.....and when comparing those two types, the A32X family did offer certain advantages. Of course, Boeing went on to develop the 737NG family which competes head-to-head with the A32X.....many claim that UA's decision to acquire the A320 was one of the major reasons for Boeing to start the development of the 737NG.

Thank you to everyone that was able to answer my questions, especially Dutchjet, very informative. Dutchjet, you are now a respected user of mine, you should feel very honored  

[Edited 2006-04-07 01:15:32]
 
NumberTwelve
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 8:57 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 4:29 pm

Quoting Dalb777 (Reply 1):
and couldn't wait for Boeing.

Why should they?

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 21):
You ought to try shitting out of your ass rather than your mouth!

Another example, that attorneys don't know how to respect people.
signature censored by admin - so check my profile
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 4:41 pm

Quoting AussieItaliano (Reply 21):
Hmmmm..... Can you show that UA got added rights through Europe because of the Airbus deal? Do you have any evidence to show that this happened? I don't see any evidence of this. You ought to try shitting out of your ass rather than your mouth!

Well said, that did raise a laugh here. what Aussie stated was complete and utter rubbish!
 
vs773er
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 8:19 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:08 pm

What year did UA get their first 320? Were thre ever any in the old livery?
Communicating. Keeping up foreign relations...
 
vs773er
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 8:19 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:19 pm

In answer to my own question, 1993 (n401ua) so, no!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Carlos Aleman - SJU Aviation Photography
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Larry Wolff

Communicating. Keeping up foreign relations...
 
Rotate
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 5:52 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 5:22 pm

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 10):
God forbid anyone would ever buy an Airbus because it was just the best plane for them at the time

 checkmark  checkmark  checkmark 

Why does Airbus even exist? They make the worst planes, everybody knows that ....  banghead   banghead 
ABC
 
FlySSC
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 1:38 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:42 pm

Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 2):
airbus was pratically giving away the a320..

No. It is very well known that actually Airbus is paying the airlines to take their planes ...

Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 2):
im sure there were other reasons but those 2 come to mind..

What about : the A320's family are better than the 737NG and/or suit better UA's needs ?
 
Oykie
Posts: 1563
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 6:53 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 12):
United has placed several large follow-on orders for 320s and 319s, including a 45 airplane deal in, I think, 1999.

N

Are these the planes that where delayed to 2011 after the Chapter 11 reorganisation?
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
Joost
Posts: 1841
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:27 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 7:49 pm

Quoting JRadier (Reply 20):

at 2 seats extra that would be $175 per hour per seat extra, wich with todays ticket prices is pretty hard to get from pax (especially if it is economy).

Where does that 2 seat number come from. In all-economy/LCC configs, a 738 seats 9 passengers more than a 320 (180 vs 189). In more traditional seating layouts, 6 extra seats (1 row) is not strange.
 
B797
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 10:03 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Fri Apr 07, 2006 10:14 pm

What happened to the Jetblue deal?
 
User avatar
United787
Topic Author
Posts: 2188
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 12:20 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:58 am

Quoting NumberTwelve (Reply 22):
Why should they?

Because having two options is always better than one for competition, but in this case, it appears as though the second option, the old 737 lineup, wasn't really an option because it didn't fit United's needs. From what I am learning here, the A320 was the best single aircraft at the time, period. You can argue all day between the A320 and B737NG which I am sure many A-Netters would be happy to argue about until the cows come home. Mooooooooo.

Quoting FlySSC (Reply 27):
What about : the A320's family are better than the 737NG and/or suit better UA's needs ?

Considering the 737NG wasn't available at the time, this isn't valid.

Quoting B797 (Reply 30):
What happened to the Jetblue deal?

It was is my understanding that Boeing didn't take JetBlue seriously when they were forming and was not very aggressive in their sales to JetBlue, so Airbus got the JetBlue order. It seems like the loss of the sale and the subsequent success of JetBlue woke Boeing up and prompted huge changes in how Boeing the sell airplanes. Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
dutchjet
Posts: 7714
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2000 6:13 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 1:41 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 31):

It was is my understanding that Boeing didn't take JetBlue seriously when they were forming and was not very aggressive in their sales to JetBlue, so Airbus got the JetBlue order. It seems like the loss of the sale and the subsequent success of JetBlue woke Boeing up and prompted huge changes in how Boeing the sell airplanes. Please correct me if I am wrong.

The story is that JetBlue had every intention of starting operations with the 738 - and that JetBlue management actually preferred the 738 over the A320 for several reasons, the main one being that it could accommodate a few more passengers. Boeing's sales team was unwilling to offer JetBlue the deal that they wanted and needed - its seems that although JetBlue was the best financially-backed start up carrier, and although JetBlue had an excellent managment team and planned to start ops out of JFK, Boeing was not taking the new airline very seriously and was not offering JetBlue a super-competitive deal that would be offered to a larger airline or legacy carrier. It seems that the men and women at Toulouse were monitoring the situation and came in with an offer for A320s that JetBlue simply could not refuse....it was reportedly a very, very sharp deal that was tailored to a start up carrier such as JetBlue with good prices and some costs deferred to the backend of the deal (no, Airbus did not give the A320s to JetBlue for free, as many here at a.net speculate). Thus, JetBlue ordered the A320 (34 to start I think) and has placed many more additional orders for the type (JetBlue even suggested an A320.5, soemthing with a few more seats, but nothing came of that).........Boeing did "drop the ball" with JetBlue - it was their own fault as JetBlue actually preferred the 738 over the A320 - the only good news is that Boeing has now re-thought some of its sales practices and is back in the game competing with Airbus for each and every order.
 
FLALEFTY
Posts: 372
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:33 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 1:57 am

Quoting United787 (Reply 21):
1. UA was looking for an aircraft in the 150 pax category for expansion and also to begin the relplacement of UA's large 727 fleet.



Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 19):
3. The A320 could fly most transcon routes, the 734 did not have the range.

All true. But IIRC, the real "deal sealer" was the superior "hot & high" performance of the A320 versus the 734. This was especially important for UA's Denver hub operations.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:14 am

Quoting Flyboy7974 (Reply 7):

b/s, ua bought airbus simply to get added rights through europe. It was all politics to get better flight slots, gates and terminal space. That's all

That is an absolutely ridiculous statement.

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):

Your numbers are completely skewed. Most 738 operators in North America already start with a major CASM disadvantage to A32S operators, and it has nothing to do with the aircraft. The largest operators of the type are AA, CO and DL, which all have significantly higher systemwide CASM than jetBlue, USAirways, America West or United. Crew costs alone are no comparison, and don't tell me that Boeing mandates that you pay your pilots more to fly their aircraft. Additionally, your numbers factor in the lease rates ATA pays on their 738s, which are exactly what bankrupted them. The debt service on those is so much that it should be considered an outlier. To a certain extent, you can also include Continental with that as well. Also, United's monthly rental costs are abnormally low because of their renegotiation of lease rates in Chapter 11. Further, the average systemwide density for aircraft on the 737 side is lower than on the A320 side. You have Ted and jetBlue flying over 100 combined single class, 156 seat A320s, while the only single class 738s are the small fleet of 13 at TZ or the ultra low density ex-shuttle aircraft at Delta.

Quoting United787 (Reply 31):
Quoting B797 (Reply 30):
What happened to the Jetblue deal?

It was is my understanding that Boeing didn't take JetBlue seriously when they were forming and was not very aggressive in their sales to JetBlue, so Airbus got the JetBlue order. It seems like the loss of the sale and the subsequent success of JetBlue woke Boeing up and prompted huge changes in how Boeing the sell airplanes. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It is actually much more involved with that. The only thing that lost Boeing both the Frontier and jetBlue orders was their abject arrogance. They wanted to tell the airlines what to do and how to do it and would not bend at all. They handed those orders to Airbus. The United deal was a huge wake up call in a different way. It told Boeing that the market was there for a sub-757 sized narrowbody that could fly transcon so they built the 737NG
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18090
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:28 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 34):
The only thing that lost Boeing both the Frontier and jetBlue orders was their abject arrogance. They wanted to tell the airlines what to do and how to do it and would not bend at all.

I can vouch for the Frontier part. The story was told in public by Sam Addoms, the then CEO of Frontier.

There were still some later oddities, such as the Spirit order, on which Boeing declined even to tender.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:34 am

Quoting Mariner (Reply 35):
There were still some later oddities, such as the Spirit order, on which Boeing declined even to tender.

I halfway understand Boeing's deal with that as I think it was going to have to involve Boeing Capital and they didn't want to take a risk on a relatively tiny, privately held carrier. I disagree with the non-tender, but I see why they did it
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18090
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:40 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 36):
I think it was going to have to involve Boeing Capital and they didn't want to take a risk on a relatively tiny, privately held carrier.

That was - at least in part - the reasoning behind the Frontier situation, too.

Several of the early Frontier 319's were financed by European banks, so I would guess Airbus did the introductions.

But I can't recall when Spirit got their big infusion of cash from Oaktree Capital - before the order, or after.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9728
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 34):
Your numbers are completely skewed.

I have not skewed the data at all, I object to such an assertion, I have listed my source, I have not manipulated the data at all.

Do you understand that this is what the airlines are reporting as the cost of each airframe ? Do you understand the source of this information (Form 41) ?

Do you understand what the Total Average Aircraft Operating Cost Per ASM includes the aircraft, crew and maintenance ?

The number posted are industry wide averages across the whole USA, the seat difference was 2 seats, the 320 with 2 LESS seats than the 738.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
antoniemey
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:38 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:52 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 38):
I have not skewed the data at all, I object to such an assertion, I have listed my source, I have not manipulated the data at all.

He didn't say that YOU had played with the data, he said that the data itself didn't take into account pre-existing cost-structure differences between the airlines that operate the two types of aircraft.

I might note that WN, which has a fairly low CASM compared to most US legacies, doesn't operate any 738s, and so wouldn't be included in those numbers to possibly balance out the average a bit, although on the other end, F9 doesn't operate any 320s yet, and thus, wouldn't be included on the 320 side to skew it back that way.
Make something Idiot-proof, and the Universe will make a more inept idiot.
 
access-air
Posts: 1576
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2000 5:30 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:55 am

Helloooooooooooooooo,

Someone said it earlier.....the A320s were bought to replace the 727-200s.....as they relatively had the same passenger capacity and probably even range. So the A320s in UALs fleet have NOTHING to do with the the 737!!!
If the 737NG was not available what were they expected to buy??? My guess is that the A319 came along with the hope in replacing the 737-200s and also because the 733s or 735s didnt have the range to do long thin routes. But Definately, the 320 was to replace the 722....I knwo I had read that someplace...

Access-Air
Remember, Wherever you go, there you are!!!!
 
WesternA318
Posts: 4465
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:55 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 4:10 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):
The 738 does provide on average an additional 2 seats per aircraft for the extra cost.

Shouldnt you be comparing the 320 costs to the 734 costs instead, since that's what they were up against at the time of initial order?
Check out my blog at fl310travel.blogspot.com!
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 4:20 am

Quoting Zeke (Reply 38):
I have not skewed the data at all, I object to such an assertion, I have listed my source, I have not manipulated the data at all.

I didn't say you skewed the numbers, I said the numbers you used were skewed

Quoting Zeke (Reply 38):
The number posted are industry wide averages across the whole USA, the seat difference was 2 seats, the 320 with 2 LESS seats than the 738.

Yes, and as I said, there are many things that cause that, not the least of which is the significantly larger number of single class A320s in the market.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
JRadier
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 11:36 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:40 am

Quoting Joost (Reply 29):

Where does that 2 seat number come from. In all-economy/LCC configs, a 738 seats 9 passengers more than a 320 (180 vs 189). In more traditional seating layouts, 6 extra seats (1 row) is not strange.

As provided by Zeke (wich numbers I used in my calculations  Wink)

Quoting Zeke (Reply 11):

The 738 does provide on average an additional 2 seats per aircraft for the extra cost.
For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
 
sparkingwave
Posts: 563
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 1:01 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sat Apr 08, 2006 8:19 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 34):
Quoting Flyboy7974 (Reply 7):

b/s, ua bought airbus simply to get added rights through europe. It was all politics to get better flight slots, gates and terminal space. That's all

That is an absolutely ridiculous statement.

N1120A, you are spot-on. I second your opinion. Flyboy, that is a completely absurd statement and it's so untrue. Welcome Flyboy to my disrespected user's list.

SparkingWave ~~~
Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
 
AADC10
Posts: 1506
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 7:40 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:28 am

The reasons for UA buying the A320 series is pretty obvious: it was the only suitable replacement for the 727. I like the added width, but most people do not really notice.

Since UA will eventually take delivery on its pre-Ch. 11 A320 order I imagine that the 737 will disappear from the fleet with the rest of the capacity shifted to UAX. However, since at least some of them will be around for several more years, I hope they fix up the interiors. Under Ch. 11 they were getting kind of ratty due to deferred maintenance.
 
tu154
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 1:37 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 5:30 am

I must say from a flight attendant point of view at UAL....we much prefere the Airbus to the B737. You will hear many a crew on the 737's say.."I hate this plane, I wish we were on an Airbus!"
The A320's just seem more "up-to-date" than the antiquated 737's.....from a flight attendants working point of view. Wider, roomier, larger galleys, video system, and of course newer. Passangers seem to like them better as well.
FIRST ON THE ATLANTIC.....FIRST ON THE PACIFIC.....FIRST IN LATIN AMERICA...FIRST 'ROUND THE WORLD.....PAN AM!!
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 5:43 am

Quoting Tu154 (Reply 46):
I must say from a flight attendant point of view at UAL....we much prefere the Airbus to the B737. You will hear many a crew on the 737's say.."I hate this plane, I wish we were on an Airbus!"
The A320's just seem more "up-to-date" than the antiquated 737's.....from a flight attendants working point of view.

When I talk to United flight attendants, that comment usually only applies to ex-Shuttle by United 737s that only have half galleys and no carts. Otherwise, the F/As have told me that they prefer the 737 because they are more reliable
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
USPIT10L
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 12:24 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:36 am

Quoting FLALEFTY (Reply 33):
All true. But IIRC, the real "deal sealer" was the superior "hot & high" performance of the A320 versus the 734. This was especially important for UA's Denver hub operations.

The 734's "hot & high" problems didn't seem to stop USAir/US Airways from flying them into DEN. That's all that flew there from PIT (minimum) for years.
It's a Great Day for Hockey!
 
AirbusA6
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Why Did United Choose The A320 Family?

Sun Apr 09, 2006 12:59 pm

The A320 is a much more modern aircraft than the 733/734. Boeing were slow to realise this, and probably lost the BA competition as a result of this too.

Of course hindsight is easy, but the 737NG was a bit late in retrospect.
it's the bus to stansted (now renamed National Express a6 to ruin my username)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, AS512, b377, DaufuskieGuy, flydia, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], jbs2886, JerseyMike, karungguni, lavalampluva, LazarosK, LXA340, Miami, OzarkD9S, Pbb152, qfatwa, teva, timboflier215, trex8, Yahoo [Bot], zanl188, ZKLOU and 294 guests