Page 10 of 12

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:07 pm
by Jayafe
Strato2 wrote:
...Something always gives when you travel with Boeing comfort standards...


If it's Boeing, ain't going...

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:15 pm
by Swadian
mikejepp wrote:
Assuming AA management's primary goal is fleet simplification, which is sure seems like it is, is it possible that long term the AA fleet could consist solely of A320, B737, B787?

The 77W would be last to go, but AA could probably get by having 787s as the only widebody. Especially with the (surely) enhanced capability of the 787 in say... 10 years.


Disagree with the lack of 777 - they have the same type rating as the 787 and AA could surely get some 777X to fill in the top end down the line. Plus, their vast fleet of 77E leads me to believe they will be the last major 77E operator.

hOMSaR wrote:
O530CarrisPT wrote:
Exactly. The fleet streamlining has also the part of the maintenance. Concentrating the maintenance needs of the widebody fleet in only two aircraft types with a common rating between each other (787 and 777), instead of going for a third type without that commonality, at least in AA (A350XWB or A330neo), may help AA save a lot of money (while improving its overall reliability of the fleet) in the long haul.


Can't tell if you're referring to maintenance commonality or cockpit commonality here (presuming the latter).

Are AA's 777 and 787 pilots in the same group? I can't remember which countries consider the 777 and 787 as the same pilot type rating (I know some do, some don't).


FAA sure does and this would allow all AA aircraft to be flown by the same pilot group eventually.

fightforlove wrote:
Slash787 wrote:
I would love to see B787-10 for AA


That may be possible. I wonder if the 787-9 can handle all the missions of the 772ER. There are some routes, particularly a few of the South American routes, where AA leverage the cargo capacity of the 772ER. Could have been good missions suited for the A350, but perhaps a 787-10 could handle them more efficiently.


AA could just increase frequency to daily on routes like LAX-GRU and LAX-EZE. I doubt the 78J could handle any cargo better than the 789 as it is a "simple stretch". I also doubt the 77E will be going anywhere anytime soon as the large AA fleet of 47 aircraft can soldier on for over a decade yet on Hawaii and South America routes.

ckfred wrote:
I read the news release on AA's website, posted Friday afternoon. It's 22 788s, which start to arrive in 2020 and 25 789s, which start to arrive in 2023. There is an option for up to 28 additional 787s.

The release says that the 788s will replace the 763s. The number seems right, since there are still roughly 24 767s in service. I assume that the last 763 will leave in 2021 or 2022. Remember that AA bought 9 763s in 2001, replace the 9 in TWA's fleet. I think those 763s arrived in 2001 and 2002. So, AA would be getting about 20 years or so of service out of the youngest 763s.

According to the release the 25 789s will replace the A333s and the oldest 772s. Now, I thought the A333 were leaving in the 2018-2020 time range. The first 772s started to arrive in 1999. So, if the first 772 retires in 2023, AA that plane will have been in service 24 years.

Here's the question I have. Yes, the 789 can roughly cover the same passenger load as a 772. But, what is the difference in cargo payload between the 789 and the 772. We know that AA derives a lot of revenue from cargo and mail. One of the reasons why the A300 stuck around for so long was because it could carry a lot of cargo.

I get the feeling that AA is looking at the potential to replace its 47 772s with a mix of 789s, 787-10s, and maybe some 777Xs. At the same time, AA hasn't mentioned the A332s. I wonder if Boeing's proposed MoM aircraft will play into future AA orders.


AA hasn't mentioned the A332 presumably because they are younger than every other AA widebody besides the 787 itself. However, we have seen AA's ruthless drive to fleet simplification with pending retirement of the E190, A333, and 763, so they may do the same with the A332 - sell them young when they still have value. Perhaps this will occur around the 2023-2025 timeframe rather than retirement of 77Es. A paid-for 77E on Hawaii and South America routes could be just as profitable as a A332, but the A332 can net more on the used market rather than going to scrap.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:16 pm
by 1989worstyear
ckfred wrote:
I read the news release on AA's website, posted Friday afternoon. It's 22 788s, which start to arrive in 2020 and 25 789s, which start to arrive in 2023. There is an option for up to 28 additional 787s.

The release says that the 788s will replace the 763s. The number seems right, since there are still roughly 24 767s in service. I assume that the last 763 will leave in 2021 or 2022. Remember that AA bought 9 763s in 2001, replace the 9 in TWA's fleet. I think those 763s arrived in 2001 and 2002. So, AA would be getting about 20 years or so of service out of the youngest 763s.

According to the release the 25 789s will replace the A333s and the oldest 772s. Now, I thought the A333 were leaving in the 2018-2020 time range. The first 772s started to arrive in 1999. So, if the first 772 retires in 2023, AA that plane will have been in service 24 years.

Here's the question I have. Yes, the 789 can roughly cover the same passenger load as a 772. But, what is the difference in cargo payload between the 789 and the 772. We know that AA derives a lot of revenue from cargo and mail. One of the reasons why the A300 stuck around for so long was because it could carry a lot of cargo.

I get the feeling that AA is looking at the potential to replace its 47 772s with a mix of 789s, 787-10s, and maybe some 777Xs. At the same time, AA hasn't mentioned the A332s. I wonder if Boeing's proposed MoM aircraft will play into future AA orders.



Close - the last 9 were delivered in 2003 :smile:

Younger than the old A333's that won't now be leaving until the mid '20s.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:23 pm
by DFW17L
WingsOfLove wrote:
Arion640 wrote:
Who was the supplier of the original seat?


Zodiac. Delayed 787 delivery. Delayed 777 retrofit by almost 2 years.


The Zodiac seats in the 788 are terrible. Though not immediately obvious, they are paired. Which means if your "seat mate" drops into their seat, they interrupt your nappy-time.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:23 pm
by Arion640
DFW17L wrote:
WingsOfLove wrote:
Arion640 wrote:
Who was the supplier of the original seat?


Zodiac. Delayed 787 delivery. Delayed 777 retrofit by almost 2 years.


The Zodiac seats in the 788 are terrible. Though not immediately obvious, they are paired. Which means if your "seat mate" drops into their seat, they interrupt your nappy-time.


Try BA club world for fun!

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:44 pm
by cm642
Andy33 wrote:
cm642 wrote:
neomax wrote:

And MIA and PHX? This is the million dollar question.


I can see them from PHX-LHR, NRT and hub to hub PHX-DFW, ORD in the future.


You can? Will demand for PHX to LHR grow to such an extent that the existing Joint Venture BA flight can no longer handle it? Bear in mind that AA gets a share of the proceeds from this flight, without the expense of either setting up 787 pilot and flight attendant groups in PHX, or overnighting crews from other hubs in PHX.
Overnighting crews at both ends of a route effectively makes it a point to point route, and AA have just said very publicly that this is not the way they will go in future. So either there need to be enough 787s based in PHX to justify a full crew domicile, or BA will continue to operate all PHX-LHR on behalf of the two airlines.


What I'm saying is I can see 787's at PHX in the future regardless. If they're meant to eventually replace the A330's which AA has been using at times on CLT/PHL-PHX, it's more than likely going to be seen at PHX. With the upcoming 744 retirements I wouldn't be surprised to see AA add a 787 to LHR to compliment the BA service or to help back fill demand depending on what aircraft BA utilizes for the route. BA currently has 36 744's with only 18 A350-1000's on order, that's not enough to cover the current routes that the 747 will vacate unless east coast routes of the US and some other 744 routes are served by the upcoming 10 A321neo's which could help free up some room for the A350's. (Just my opinion)

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:46 pm
by PlanesNTrains
Jayafe wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
...Something always gives when you travel with Boeing comfort standards...


If it's Boeing, ain't going...


People are keeling over in shock at your claims. lol

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:00 pm
by AA321T
cm642 wrote:
Andy33 wrote:
cm642 wrote:

I can see them from PHX-LHR, NRT and hub to hub PHX-DFW, ORD in the future.


You can? Will demand for PHX to LHR grow to such an extent that the existing Joint Venture BA flight can no longer handle it? Bear in mind that AA gets a share of the proceeds from this flight, without the expense of either setting up 787 pilot and flight attendant groups in PHX, or overnighting crews from other hubs in PHX.
Overnighting crews at both ends of a route effectively makes it a point to point route, and AA have just said very publicly that this is not the way they will go in future. So either there need to be enough 787s based in PHX to justify a full crew domicile, or BA will continue to operate all PHX-LHR on behalf of the two airlines.


What I'm saying is I can see 787's at PHX in the future regardless. If they're meant to eventually replace the A330's which AA has been using at times on CLT/PHL-PHX, it's more than likely going to be seen at PHX. With the upcoming 744 retirements I wouldn't be surprised to see AA add a 787 to LHR to compliment the BA service or to help back fill demand depending on what aircraft BA utilizes for the route. BA currently has 36 744's with only 18 A350-1000's on order, that's not enough to cover the current routes that the 747 will vacate unless east coast routes of the US and some other 744 routes are served by the upcoming 10 A321neo's which could help free up some room for the A350's. (Just my opinion)

In a recent town hall, Vasu, the VP of Network Planning, was asked about PHX-LHR on AA metal. He chuckled and said that all he was willing to say was not this year. He’s typically pretty candid and will say a flat “no” if it’s not going to happen. I’m with you and could see AA putting a 787 on this route if BA switches PHX to 787. Plus, they opened up MD80, 777, and 787 training to LUS flight attendants last month and looking at the rosters a very large number of them are PHX based.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:33 pm
by MrBretz
I get a laugh when people around here when some say how uncomfortable Boeing metal is. From my experience as a business and leisure traveler, not a professional, the A or B has little to do with comfort. I used to love the A320 until I had experienced a UA one with slimline seats. It was uncomfortable since I was in a middle seat on an over 4 hour flight in regular economy. On the other hand, I have done almost 6 hours in a 737 in premium economy and loved it. From a non-fan perspective, it the airline that sets up the interior and they are to blame. And it is also my fault to some extent for not buying premium economy or higher too. At least that's my opinion.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:18 am
by Stitch
Stitch wrote:
And yet Singapore Airlines and SCOOT can fit 18" seats into their 787s at 3x3x3 despite Boeing's villainy... :scratchchin:

Strato2 wrote:
Non sequitur. What is the armrest width? What is the aisle width? Something always gives when you travel with Boeing comfort standards. Mind you I never had any problems fitting my arse in any Boeing plane. The problem was/is always with the shoulder and elbow space.


"All 18-inch wide seats are equal, but some are more equal than others."

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:18 am
by klkla
MrBretz wrote:
I get a laugh when people around here when some say how uncomfortable Boeing metal is. From my experience as a business and leisure traveler, not a professional, the A or B has little to do with comfort. I used to love the A320 until I had experienced a UA one with slimline seats. It was uncomfortable since I was in a middle seat on an over 4 hour flight in regular economy. On the other hand, I have done almost 6 hours in a 737 in premium economy and loved it. From a non-fan perspective, it the airline that sets up the interior and they are to blame. And it is also my fault to some extent for not buying premium economy or higher too. At least that's my opinion.


Don't try to bring logic to this topic lol. It is impossible to use logic against fanboys (A or B).

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 4:25 am
by kitplane01
Newbiepilot wrote:
Revelation wrote:

On another thread we have one member campaigning for an ultra-weight-reduced 787-8 to target the MoM space.

Now we have a campaign for a heavier 787-8 to target the traditional carrier role.

End result: I have a headache.


I have noticed this too. There is a group of people on A.net that think the 787-8 should be more like the 787-9, which would likely make it heavier and even less attractive to airlines like American. There is another group saying that it should be shrunk and lightened. I seriously struggle how they could get the weight down 10tons, but that is a separate topic.

This two competing opinions don’t make sense to me. Everyone seems to want to redesign the airplane that AA just ordered.


You both seem to be assuming that fitting 787-9 components onto the -8 will add weight. But that's not obvious. The 787-9 was designed after the -8, and using the lessons learned from the -8. It could be the -9 parts are simply better (lighter weight, cost less, lower maintenance, etc.)

I will agree that the main wing spar of a -9 carries more load, and therefore presumably weighs more. But most parts are not on the critical load path.

Finally, I think it's fair to assume that Boeing has competent engineers and accountants. They have more data than we do. They will tend to avoid doing things that are obviously dumb.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:01 am
by Andy33
cm642 wrote:

What I'm saying is I can see 787's at PHX in the future regardless. If they're meant to eventually replace the A330's which AA has been using at times on CLT/PHL-PHX, it's more than likely going to be seen at PHX. With the upcoming 744 retirements I wouldn't be surprised to see AA add a 787 to LHR to compliment the BA service or to help back fill demand depending on what aircraft BA utilizes for the route. BA currently has 36 744's with only 18 A350-1000's on order, that's not enough to cover the current routes that the 747 will vacate unless east coast routes of the US and some other 744 routes are served by the upcoming 10 A321neo's which could help free up some room for the A350's. (Just my opinion)

Sure you could very likely see them at PHX flying in from other AA hubs. What I was less certain of was that any would operate international routes from PHX that don't touch any other AA hub. After all none of the A332/A333s do this now.
Regarding BA's 744s, you must have missed the extensive threads on the subject.
To summarise - there aren't just the 18 A350-1000s coming, there are also 12 787-10s on order, all thirty planes should arrive between 2019 and early 2023. By the end of 2022 there will be just 12 744s left, and they will be all gone by February 2024.
All of this is a matter of public record, not speculation,
So a further order for something is expected fairly soon for delivery during 2023. Now whether that is more A350s, more 787s, or even more A380s, or some combination, we don't know yet, but they (or parent IAG) hold options for all three types. They do have options for A320 series as well,
But don't assume that this means PHX sees brand new aircraft in BA livery. It is also well within range of their 772-ERs, 77Ws 788s, 789s, and A380s (though the last seems unlikely!)

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:08 am
by LAXLHR
Jayafe wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
...Something always gives when you travel with Boeing comfort standards...


If it's Boeing, ain't going...


Utterly ridiculous!

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:31 am
by RJMAZ
kitplane01 wrote:
You both seem to be assuming that fitting 787-9 components onto the -8 will add weight. But that's not obvious. The 787-9 was designed after the -8, and using the lessons learned from the -8. It could be the -9 parts are simply better (lighter weight, cost less, lower maintenance, etc.)

I will agree that the main wing spar of a -9 carries more load, and therefore presumably weighs more. But most parts are not on the critical load path.

Finally, I think it's fair to assume that Boeing has competent engineers and accountants. They have more data than we do. They will tend to avoid doing things that are obviously dumb.

Nope this is completely wrong. Making a 787-9 shrink will weigh many tons more than a standard 787-8. This means fuel burn will easily be 1-2% more on the vast majority of routes the 787-8 flies. That's millions of dollars per year in extra fuel for each aircraft just to add 1000nm extra range that probably won't get used. Crazy!

Most 787-9 specific parts are not lighter, they are stronger and heavier.

For example the main landing gear.

The 787-8 uses 50×20.0 R22 tyres the 787-9 and 10 uses larger 54x21.0 R23. The trucks are significantly larger and heavier on the 787-9/10. They have much larger brakes and the wheels are spaced out further to reduce pavement loading. The main strut is also heavier and stronger on the 787-9. This adds approximately 700kg of extra weight. Or a 0.5% increase in empty weight.

Then you have the wing strengthening and the centre wing box strengthening. Both have added reinforcement. Same material but thicker which means extra weight.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:51 am
by dare100em
RJMAZ wrote:
Nope this is completely wrong. Making a 787-9 shrink will weigh many tons more than a standard 787-8. This means fuel burn will easily be 1-2% more on the vast majority of routes the 787-8 flies. That's millions of dollars per year in extra fuel for each aircraft just to add 1000nm extra range that probably won't get used. Crazy!

Most 787-9 specific parts are not lighter, they are stronger and heavier.

For example the main landing gear.

The 787-8 uses 50×20.0 R22 tyres the 787-9 and 10 uses larger 54x21.0 R23. The trucks are significantly larger and heavier on the 787-9/10. They have much larger brakes and the wheels are spaced out further to reduce pavement loading. The main strut is also heavier and stronger on the 787-9. This adds approximately 700kg of extra weight. Or a 0.5% increase in empty weight.

Then you have the wing strengthening and the centre wing box strengthening. Both have added reinforcement. Same material but thicker which means extra weight.


However ist is obvious that they will only implement those parts which are lighter and easier to manufacture [than in the original 787-8]. Exactly the reason they implement the rear section changes, not the CWB or the main landing gear structure. That's the sole reason the 787-9 has only 40% additional fuel burn per added passanger [than the original 787-8].

An [semi-] upgraded 787-8 will be lighter than the original and therfore be more attractive. I guess the killing of the A330-800 also played a role in implementing changes to the 787.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:07 am
by RJMAZ
The 787-9 parts that will be fitted to the 787-8 won't be to save weight. They are being fitted because they are cheaper to manufacture. You also gain economy of scale by making all models share the same part which would reduce its price.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:14 am
by Jayafe
RJMAZ wrote:
The 787-9 parts that will be fitted to the 787-8 won't be to save weight. They are being fitted because they are cheaper to manufacture. You also gain economy of scale by making all models share the same part which would reduce its price.


So airlines might end up with planes with (in theory) a lower acquisition cost, but indeed heavier and more expensive to operate. Nice game...

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:21 am
by dampfnudel
MrBretz wrote:
I get a laugh when people around here when some say how uncomfortable Boeing metal is. From my experience as a business and leisure traveler, not a professional, the A or B has little to do with comfort. I used to love the A320 until I had experienced a UA one with slimline seats. It was uncomfortable since I was in a middle seat on an over 4 hour flight in regular economy. On the other hand, I have done almost 6 hours in a 737 in premium economy and loved it. From a non-fan perspective, it the airline that sets up the interior and they are to blame. And it is also my fault to some extent for not buying premium economy or higher too. At least that's my opinion.


:checkmark: Airlines determine how comfortable their aircraft will be for passengers or specifically, Y passengers.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:25 am
by RJMAZ
Jayafe wrote:
So airlines might end up with planes with (in theory) a lower acquisition cost, but indeed heavier and more expensive to operate. Nice game...

They would keep the more expensive 787-8 part if swapping to the 787-9 part meant a noticeable weight increase. Boeing isn't stupid.

But they could indeed fit a part 5kg heavier if it was meant a big cost saving. There's really no 787-9 parts that are lighter because nearly every part on the 787-9 is under increased load.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:31 am
by r2rho
From what we can tell, the remaining differences in center fuse / wingbox / MLG help the -8 rather than hurt it.

Honestly, I'm starting to get lost in the differences between -8 and -9/10; it is hard to get an easy overview of what has been retrofitted when and what not. The linked article at least says that there are still many manufacturing differences between a -8 and -9/10.

Commonality will help -8 gain range, but more range really isn't needed.
I agree. IMO, I would retrofit everything from the -9 except the MLG and any others associated to the higher MTOW of the -9, no need for it.

It would lower production cost, but presumably at some cost in engineering and certification time.

The main advantage would indeed be manufacturing commonality and thus savings for Boeing. The engineering and certification should be minimal as all the work is done for -9/10 already; I would think it would pay off quickly with the manufacturing savings.

Most 787-9 specific parts are not lighter, they are stronger and heavier.

Only the wing box and MLG, as you yourself mention. No need to retrofit those as the -8 doesn't need the range. But there are (were? who knows?) many other manufacturing differences.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:06 am
by Eyad89
I am really curious, I would like to compare the savings of simplifying the fleet types versus the paid penalties for canceling the A350 order. Sure, AA would've only gone for this step because they would be gaining financially, but is the difference between the two that much?

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:16 pm
by Newbiepilot
Eyad89 wrote:
I am really curious, I would like to compare the savings of simplifying the fleet types versus the paid penalties for canceling the A350 order. Sure, AA would've only gone for this step because they would be gaining financially, but is the difference between the two that much?


I don’t think you will find a comparison involving what cancellation fees or penalties had to be paid. A few of us speculate that there wouldn’t be any. Airbus twice cancelled the derivative that US Airways ordered and required them to renegotiate the contracts. The first A350 order from 2005 for 2011 delivery was for the cancelled MK1 version. That order was renegotiated in 2007 into an A350-800 order with 2013 deliveries. That order was renegotiated again in 2009 to be 18 A350-800s and 4 A350-900s. That order was again renegotiated in 2013 to be all A350-900s.

Given that Airbus twice canceled the derivative that US Airways ordered and also missed in delivery dates significantly, there likely aren’t any cancellation penalties and deposits were likely applied to other orders. I don’t know if this is true, but I can’t see Airbus keeping any money from AA since if Airbus had actually built the plane that was ordered by US Airways, it would already have been in service for 7 years by now.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:40 pm
by jeffrey0032j
Newbiepilot wrote:
Eyad89 wrote:
I am really curious, I would like to compare the savings of simplifying the fleet types versus the paid penalties for canceling the A350 order. Sure, AA would've only gone for this step because they would be gaining financially, but is the difference between the two that much?


I don’t think you will find a comparison involving what cancellation fees or penalties had to be paid. A few of us speculate that there wouldn’t be any. Airbus twice cancelled the derivative that US Airways ordered and required them to renegotiate the contracts. The first A350 order from 2005 for 2011 delivery was for the cancelled MK1 version. That order was renegotiated in 2007 into an A350-800 order with 2013 deliveries. That order was renegotiated again in 2009 to be 18 A350-800s and 4 A350-900s. That order was again renegotiated in 2013 to be all A350-900s.

Given that Airbus twice canceled the derivative that US Airways ordered and also missed in delivery dates significantly, there likely aren’t any cancellation penalties and deposits were likely applied to other orders. I don’t know if this is true, but I can’t see Airbus keeping any money from AA since if Airbus had actually built the plane that was ordered by US Airways, it would already have been in service for 7 years by now.

Which is ironic given that the A350 Mk I is essentially an A330neo. They've missed the boat on this on their own accord.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:05 pm
by tvarad
Eyad89 wrote:
I am really curious, I would like to compare the savings of simplifying the fleet types versus the paid penalties for canceling the A350 order. Sure, AA would've only gone for this step because they would be gaining financially, but is the difference between the two that much?


While it doesn't have specific numbers, this story should clarify your doubts to some extent. Specifically:

......
In conjunction with the expanded Dreamliner purchase, American Airlines is canceling its A350 order for good. As a result, it will record a special charge related to writing off purchase deposits that it will forfeit to Airbus.

Nevertheless, switching from the A350-900 to a mix of 787-8s and 787-9s should significantly reduce the company's aircraft acquisition costs. US Airways was a small, struggling carrier when it placed the initial A350 order, so it probably didn't get especially good pricing.

By contrast, American Airlines is the largest airline in the world. Furthermore, the 787 order it just placed was substantially larger than the 25-30 airplane deal industry observers had expected. The carrier likely used its purchasing power to get a very good deal from Boeing, which has been chasing Dreamliner sales aggressively this year by offering low prices.
....

It looks like AA was able to swallow the cancellation penalties to switch the order and their purchasing clout helped ease the 787 deal.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:16 pm
by bob75013
Eyad89 wrote:
I am really curious, I would like to compare the savings of simplifying the fleet types versus the paid penalties for canceling the A350 order. Sure, AA would've only gone for this step because they would be gaining financially, but is the difference between the two that much?


Search upthread and you will find a post that says there are no paid penalties to Airbus for cancelling the A350 order -- maybe penalties to engine makers, but not to Airbus.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:38 pm
by par13del
The next SEC filing should list the special charge, if it is broken down by all items we will all know how much deposits they lost along with any penalties.
At least we know we will finally know the numbers.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:42 pm
by MIflyer12
Eyad89 wrote:
I am really curious, I would like to compare the savings of simplifying the fleet types versus the paid penalties for canceling the A350 order. Sure, AA would've only gone for this step because they would be gaining financially, but is the difference between the two that much?


You can't know that unless you know how a carrier values fleet simplicity. Southwest values it a lot, paying $160 million up front and retraining a bunch of AirTran pilots to make 717s go away. If Delta placed a high value on it the carrier wouldn't have MD-88s, MD-90s, A320s and 738s all between 149 and 160 seats.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:53 pm
by Atlwarrior
Wow American Airlines debt load is so huge now.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:05 pm
by mikejepp
Today's 8K shows that the A330-300 will be sticking around to at least 2021 and B767-300 retirement accelerated, with only 5 frames remaining at YE2020. Looks like a planning change has been made to use new 787 deliveries to park the 763s quickly.

Also, MD-80 and E-190 fleets still being retired in 2019. Fewer 737max deliveries next year, but more 738s stick around.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:11 pm
by jeffrey0032j
mikejepp wrote:
Today's 8K shows that the A330-300 will be sticking around to at least 2021 and B767-300 retirement accelerated, with only 5 frames remaining at YE2020. Looks like a planning change has been made to use new 787 deliveries to park the 763s quickly.

Also, MD-80 and E-190 fleets still being retired in 2019. Fewer 737max deliveries next year, but more 738s stick around.

I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing did a deal to take those 763s. The GE 763ERs are in high demand in the freight market and it is in Boeing's interest to ensure a sustainable supply of 763ER feedstock for freighter conversion.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:12 pm
by Boof02671
Why would Boeing take them?

If the are owned by AA, they can sell them directly to anyone and get the most money.

If they are leased, they go back to the leaseholder if the lease is up, if it isn’t it will be parked in the desert unless an agreement is reached with the lessor.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:13 pm
by Stitch
RJMAZ wrote:
Most 787-9 specific parts are not lighter, they are stronger and heavier.


The 787-9 did undergo a significant optimization of the weight of many of it's components which resulted in an overall reduction in the aircraft's empty weight. The 787-8 started incorporating many of those weight-optimized parts, as well, and I have heard at full benefit this shed about 4,000kg off the Basic Empty Weight of the 787-8.

That being said, there are of course parts on the 787-9 and 787-10 designed specifically to support the higher Operating Weights of those two frames and in many cases they will weigh more than those used on the 787-8.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:15 pm
by HI442ct
Jayafe wrote:
Strato2 wrote:
...Something always gives when you travel with Boeing comfort standards...


If it's Boeing, ain't going...


I doubt if Boeing cares, don't let the door hit you in the a#$, seriously you act like American's order is a personal vendetta against you, step off your high horse!, Glad AA is putting together a nice fleet

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:40 pm
by seabosdca
neomax wrote:
ATL-JNB is at the ragged edge of the 777-200LR. MIA-JNB is shorter, but not by much. The 777-200LR was so close to its operating limit that the tires had to be modified so that it could make it. If the 777-200LR can barely make it, the 789 probably won't be able to, at least not without modifications.


Based on the March 2018 published charts, AA's 255-seat 789 with a thrust bump could probably fly about 180-200 passengers JNB-MIA, assuming a nighttime or morning departure with temperatures around 15-20 C. It could easily fly a full passenger load MIA-JNB. The issue is not one of raw range capability, but of field performance at JNB, which is very high and occasionally hot.

Late edit: AA could almost certainly fill all the seats on its 198-seat 787-8, and probably take a bit of cargo as well. The 787-8 has extremely good hot and high performance.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:48 pm
by Swadian
seabosdca wrote:
neomax wrote:
ATL-JNB is at the ragged edge of the 777-200LR. MIA-JNB is shorter, but not by much. The 777-200LR was so close to its operating limit that the tires had to be modified so that it could make it. If the 777-200LR can barely make it, the 789 probably won't be able to, at least not without modifications.


Based on the March 2018 published charts, AA's 255-seat 789 with a thrust bump could probably fly about 180-200 passengers JNB-MIA, assuming a nighttime or morning departure with temperatures around 15-20 C. It could easily fly a full passenger load MIA-JNB. The issue is not one of raw range capability, but of field performance at JNB, which is very high and occasionally hot.

Late edit: AA could almost certainly fill all the seats on its 198-seat 787-8, and probably take a bit of cargo as well. The 787-8 has extremely good hot and high performance.


AA has 285 seats in the 789, not 255 seats. Those extra 30 seats may preclude efficient performance on JNB-MIA. That being said, perhaps AA could launch MIA-CPT instead? How hot and high is CPT? CPT currently has no flights to the US and I presume a MIA-CPT could be profitable on the 788?

Other than that, what would be needed to do JNB-MIA with full passenger load? Perhaps 778?

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:48 pm
by winginit
Atlwarrior wrote:
Wow American Airlines debt load is so huge now.


It really is staggering, and what has surprised me is that we haven't to my knowledge heard a peep out of AA management as to how they anticipate reducing it. Quite the contrast to DL's balance sheet focus.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:50 pm
by dmstorm22
Swadian wrote:
seabosdca wrote:
neomax wrote:
ATL-JNB is at the ragged edge of the 777-200LR. MIA-JNB is shorter, but not by much. The 777-200LR was so close to its operating limit that the tires had to be modified so that it could make it. If the 777-200LR can barely make it, the 789 probably won't be able to, at least not without modifications.


Based on the March 2018 published charts, AA's 255-seat 789 with a thrust bump could probably fly about 180-200 passengers JNB-MIA, assuming a nighttime or morning departure with temperatures around 15-20 C. It could easily fly a full passenger load MIA-JNB. The issue is not one of raw range capability, but of field performance at JNB, which is very high and occasionally hot.

Late edit: AA could almost certainly fill all the seats on its 198-seat 787-8, and probably take a bit of cargo as well. The 787-8 has extremely good hot and high performance.


AA has 285 seats in the 789, not 255 seats. Those extra 30 seats may preclude efficient performance on JNB-MIA. That being said, perhaps AA could launch MIA-CPT instead? How hot and high is CPT? CPT currently has no flights to the US and I presume a MIA-CPT could be profitable on the 788?

Other than that, what would be needed to do JNB-MIA with full passenger load? Perhaps 778?


CPT is not hot-and-high, but has a much smaller O&D base to pull from (and less connections across S. Africa or Africa in general, for what that would be worth to AA on the route).

It's a huge tourist destination but far smaller business destination than JNB. There's a reason even for the few cases we hvae SA-USA service it's in and out of JNB despite the complications of JNB's altitude and climate.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:57 pm
by Swadian
dmstorm22 wrote:
Swadian wrote:
seabosdca wrote:

Based on the March 2018 published charts, AA's 255-seat 789 with a thrust bump could probably fly about 180-200 passengers JNB-MIA, assuming a nighttime or morning departure with temperatures around 15-20 C. It could easily fly a full passenger load MIA-JNB. The issue is not one of raw range capability, but of field performance at JNB, which is very high and occasionally hot.

Late edit: AA could almost certainly fill all the seats on its 198-seat 787-8, and probably take a bit of cargo as well. The 787-8 has extremely good hot and high performance.


AA has 285 seats in the 789, not 255 seats. Those extra 30 seats may preclude efficient performance on JNB-MIA. That being said, perhaps AA could launch MIA-CPT instead? How hot and high is CPT? CPT currently has no flights to the US and I presume a MIA-CPT could be profitable on the 788?

Other than that, what would be needed to do JNB-MIA with full passenger load? Perhaps 778?


CPT is not hot-and-high, but has a much smaller O&D base to pull from (and less connections across S. Africa or Africa in general, for what that would be worth to AA on the route).

It's a huge tourist destination but far smaller business destination than JNB. There's a reason even for the few cases we hvae SA-USA service it's in and out of JNB despite the complications of JNB's altitude and climate.


How about pulling a Bolivia and doing a MIA-JNB-CPT-MIA? Then there's no need to take off from JNB for the long haul to MIA and business travelers get to stay on the same plane while CPT also gets its first nonstop to the Americas?

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:04 pm
by dmstorm22
Swadian wrote:
dmstorm22 wrote:
Swadian wrote:

AA has 285 seats in the 789, not 255 seats. Those extra 30 seats may preclude efficient performance on JNB-MIA. That being said, perhaps AA could launch MIA-CPT instead? How hot and high is CPT? CPT currently has no flights to the US and I presume a MIA-CPT could be profitable on the 788?

Other than that, what would be needed to do JNB-MIA with full passenger load? Perhaps 778?


CPT is not hot-and-high, but has a much smaller O&D base to pull from (and less connections across S. Africa or Africa in general, for what that would be worth to AA on the route).

It's a huge tourist destination but far smaller business destination than JNB. There's a reason even for the few cases we hvae SA-USA service it's in and out of JNB despite the complications of JNB's altitude and climate.


How about pulling a Bolivia and doing a MIA-JNB-CPT-MIA? Then there's no need to take off from JNB for the long haul to MIA and business travelers get to stay on the same plane while CPT also gets its first nonstop to the Americas?


Definitely possible. Think I've seen the JNB-CPT triangle route tossed around here as both a future route or something that has happened in the past as well.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:15 pm
by airzona11
winginit wrote:
Atlwarrior wrote:
Wow American Airlines debt load is so huge now.


It really is staggering, and what has surprised me is that we haven't to my knowledge heard a peep out of AA management as to how they anticipate reducing it. Quite the contrast to DL's balance sheet focus.


AA drops hint that they are replacing older, less reliable frames with newer, more efficient frames. That is a place to start. AAs debt is in no way no serviceable. Delta is reducing their debt loads, but that isn't the holy grail. AA is very successful as well in their approach.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:25 pm
by seabosdca
Swadian wrote:
AA has 285 seats in the 789, not 255 seats.


Oops... :bomb:

Other than that, what would be needed to do JNB-MIA with full passenger load? Perhaps 778?


Well... er... I hate to say it, but the A350-900 could almost certainly do it.

In the Boeing world your choices are the 787-8, the 777-200LR, or the 777-8.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:25 pm
by ckfred
You have to assume that any debt AA takes on has to be a favorable rates. Let's not forget that the Fed may be looking at another rate increase or two for this year and another one to three rate increases next year, trying to get interest rates back to what is considered normal levels for the last 50 years or so.

In that regard, taking on a large amount of debt today could be cheaper than taking on more modest levels over the next few years, because of higher interest rates.

By the same token, Warren Buffet has added airline stocks to Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio. Buffet feels that current management at the major carriers are now about selling the right amount of seats at fares that generate sufficient revenue to pay for operating costs and capital costs while generating profits. The days of chasing market share at crazy low prices are gone.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:32 pm
by Swadian
seabosdca wrote:
Swadian wrote:
AA has 285 seats in the 789, not 255 seats.


Oops... :bomb:

Other than that, what would be needed to do JNB-MIA with full passenger load? Perhaps 778?


Well... er... I hate to say it, but the A350-900 could almost certainly do it.

In the Boeing world your choices are the 787-8, the 777-200LR, or the 777-8.


Doubt AA will add 77L or go back to A359 but could a 788 really do JNB-MIA with a full load? AA will have 42x 788 (largest operator of the type) and if the 788 could do it I don't doubt they will try.

airzona11 wrote:
winginit wrote:
Atlwarrior wrote:
Wow American Airlines debt load is so huge now.


It really is staggering, and what has surprised me is that we haven't to my knowledge heard a peep out of AA management as to how they anticipate reducing it. Quite the contrast to DL's balance sheet focus.


AA drops hint that they are replacing older, less reliable frames with newer, more efficient frames. That is a place to start. AAs debt is in no way no serviceable. Delta is reducing their debt loads, but that isn't the holy grail. AA is very successful as well in their approach.


AA may not have as much debt as you think. They dropped the A359 order and replaced it with this 787 order with what must have been a steep discount from Boeing, so net debt may not have increased all that much especially with deferred delivery of some 8MAX and an especially efficient crop of existing A321 coupled with paid-for 77Es on the widebody side.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 6:47 pm
by 1989worstyear
jeffrey0032j wrote:
mikejepp wrote:
Today's 8K shows that the A330-300 will be sticking around to at least 2021 and B767-300 retirement accelerated, with only 5 frames remaining at YE2020. Looks like a planning change has been made to use new 787 deliveries to park the 763s quickly.

Also, MD-80 and E-190 fleets still being retired in 2019. Fewer 737max deliveries next year, but more 738s stick around.

I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing did a deal to take those 763s. The GE 763ERs are in high demand in the freight market and it is in Boeing's interest to ensure a sustainable supply of 763ER feedstock for freighter conversion.


This fleet planning change proves the A333's were designed and built better.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:03 pm
by seabosdca
Swadian wrote:
Doubt AA will add 77L or go back to A359 but could a 788 really do JNB-MIA with a full load?


Pretty sure it could if configured correctly. I don't know if it is, though. AA does have the high-thrust GE engine option (GEnx-1B70) but I don't know if they have the maximum 228 t MTOW option. It could change the business case for the route if AA would have to uprate the whole 787-8 fleet (and pay landing fees accordingly) or operate the route using only a subfleet.

The other issue is that the economics of a 7000 nm route with such a small aircraft are inherently difficult.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:07 pm
by Boof02671
1989worstyear wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
mikejepp wrote:
Today's 8K shows that the A330-300 will be sticking around to at least 2021 and B767-300 retirement accelerated, with only 5 frames remaining at YE2020. Looks like a planning change has been made to use new 787 deliveries to park the 763s quickly.

Also, MD-80 and E-190 fleets still being retired in 2019. Fewer 737max deliveries next year, but more 738s stick around.

I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing did a deal to take those 763s. The GE 763ERs are in high demand in the freight market and it is in Boeing's interest to ensure a sustainable supply of 763ER feedstock for freighter conversion.


This fleet planning change proves the A333's were designed and built better.

Then why are they getting rid of them and didn’t buy more?

Your statement is ridiculous.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:10 pm
by Polot
1989worstyear wrote:
jeffrey0032j wrote:
mikejepp wrote:
Today's 8K shows that the A330-300 will be sticking around to at least 2021 and B767-300 retirement accelerated, with only 5 frames remaining at YE2020. Looks like a planning change has been made to use new 787 deliveries to park the 763s quickly.

Also, MD-80 and E-190 fleets still being retired in 2019. Fewer 737max deliveries next year, but more 738s stick around.

I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing did a deal to take those 763s. The GE 763ERs are in high demand in the freight market and it is in Boeing's interest to ensure a sustainable supply of 763ER feedstock for freighter conversion.


This fleet planning change proves the A333's were designed and built better.

Except if the A333s are all gone by 2021 that means that AA operated specific 767 airframes longer than the A333s. Some of the current 767 frames are 25 years old, A333 retirement by 2021 means they would only be 21-22 years old at most when AA disposed of them.

I don’t think what was “designed and built better” had any factor in the decision. It is all financial. What fleet will cost more to keep until 2021, what is the expected resale value of the fleet now versus 2021, what fleet has a competitive hard product onboard that can last until 2021 without updates, etc.

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:24 pm
by PlanesNTrains
Swadian wrote:
seabosdca wrote:
Swadian wrote:
AA has 285 seats in the 789, not 255 seats.


Oops... :bomb:

Other than that, what would be needed to do JNB-MIA with full passenger load? Perhaps 778?


Well... er... I hate to say it, but the A350-900 could almost certainly do it.

In the Boeing world your choices are the 787-8, the 777-200LR, or the 777-8.


Doubt AA will add 77L or go back to A359 but could a 788 really do JNB-MIA with a full load? AA will have 42x 788 (largest operator of the type) and if the 788 could do it I don't doubt they will try.

airzona11 wrote:
winginit wrote:

It really is staggering, and what has surprised me is that we haven't to my knowledge heard a peep out of AA management as to how they anticipate reducing it. Quite the contrast to DL's balance sheet focus.


AA drops hint that they are replacing older, less reliable frames with newer, more efficient frames. That is a place to start. AAs debt is in no way no serviceable. Delta is reducing their debt loads, but that isn't the holy grail. AA is very successful as well in their approach.


AA may not have as much debt as you think. They dropped the A359 order and replaced it with this 787 order with what must have been a steep discount from Boeing, so net debt may not have increased all that much especially with deferred delivery of some 8MAX and an especially efficient crop of existing A321 coupled with paid-for 77Es on the widebody side.


I am not sure that in this context we are discussing the same things. A future order is a liability but they may pay cash for it do it might never actually be debt.

Am I wrong?

Re: American Airlines orders 47 additional 787's (22 788's and 25 789's), cancels A350 order

Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 8:25 pm
by airzona11
PlanesNTrains wrote:
Swadian wrote:
seabosdca wrote:

Oops... :bomb:



Well... er... I hate to say it, but the A350-900 could almost certainly do it.

In the Boeing world your choices are the 787-8, the 777-200LR, or the 777-8.


Doubt AA will add 77L or go back to A359 but could a 788 really do JNB-MIA with a full load? AA will have 42x 788 (largest operator of the type) and if the 788 could do it I don't doubt they will try.

airzona11 wrote:

AA drops hint that they are replacing older, less reliable frames with newer, more efficient frames. That is a place to start. AAs debt is in no way no serviceable. Delta is reducing their debt loads, but that isn't the holy grail. AA is very successful as well in their approach.


AA may not have as much debt as you think. They dropped the A359 order and replaced it with this 787 order with what must have been a steep discount from Boeing, so net debt may not have increased all that much especially with deferred delivery of some 8MAX and an especially efficient crop of existing A321 coupled with paid-for 77Es on the widebody side.


I am not sure that in this context we are discussing the same things. A future order is a liability but they may pay cash for it do it might never actually be debt.

Am I wrong?


Not at all. That is the how the airline business works.