Jetport wrote:I just can’t see why United would complicate their fleet with the A350-900. Seems like airlines are incapable of learning the fleet simplicity lesson Southwest has been beating them over the head with for many decades. It has to be cheaper to use a combination of 787-9, 787-10, and 777's to cover this space. The savings of having one less totally different fleet type surely must swamp the efficiency gains on the small percentage of routes the A350-900 works better on than a combination of 787/777's would.
The only Airline case I can think of where more fleet types has not reduced profitability is Delta. But that is only because they got the best pricing ever on all the new/used types they added to their fleets. From what we know, DAL has paid the lowest price anyone ever has on B717, MD90, A330-900 and A220. Unless United is getting the best pricing ever on A350's and lousy pricing on 787/777's getting the A350 doesn’t seem to make sense.
Comparing UA to WN is frankly silly. The airlines have two entirely different business models and the last time I checked, WN doesn't fly to Europe, Asia, Australia or South America.
The 359 was designed as a 772ER replacement and is a huge market. The 789 is a great aircraft but is smaller than the 359; smaller passenger and cargo capacities.
People discuss the 359 and 789 as if they are direct/interchangeable competitors, they really are not. UA will utilize them on heavily trafficked routes with a capacity bump and lower trip costs.
DL has a huge number of fleets and is the undisputed profit leader of any airline on the planet. They have old aircraft which they overhaul themselves and they have the latest 359s and 220s; they have no issue with fleet complexity and UA frankly does not either.