AngMoh
Posts: 981
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 1:48 pm

Quoting anfromme (Reply 147):
This is not like me deciding to buy a bicycle or car based on its looks. If the numbers make sense I don't think that any airline nowadays can afford to go with a different airplane just because they'd really like to see a different manufacturer name printed on the safety cards.

And the banks will ask for proof of the numbers as well as recalculate the numbers using their own independent consultants. If the numbers don't match, the financing falls through.

And airlines need competitive offers from both to squeeze the best price out of the winner. If A had undercut B by 10% or more, this thread would be about a 200 NB order for A32x, but that did not happen as it was the other way around, so it is the 737. Going to 1 supplier only by default really screws your negotiation ability.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 742 743 744 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2208
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:06 pm

Quoting brilondon (Reply 149):
Could UA transfer some of their delivery slots to other airlines? In other words sell their A350's to say US and take the penalties which would still be there, but they will not be on the hook for the orders and Airbus would still get the money for the aircraft.

While it is possible for any airline to take delivery and turn around and sell or lease the a/c out, why would UA do that with the 359? It fits a role that they felt the 787 couldn't fill given its size and range. The only thing that can touch it on the missions envisioned by UA would be (possibly) the 77X-9 which likely won't be available till 2020/2021 assuming no major delays. That is about five years after the arrival of the 359 (which is replacing a far less efficient 744).
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26522
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:08 pm

Quoting anfromme (Reply 145):
According to Scott Hamilton at Leeham, price seems to be a major factor.

By increasing the production rate, Boeing is able to lower their production costs, so they can lower their Average Sales Price and still maintain their strong margins.

It's been successful with the 777 and 767, and it looks like it will also be successful on the 737.   
 
User avatar
anfromme
Posts: 883
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:58 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 4:01 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 152):
By increasing the production rate, Boeing is able to lower their production costs, so they can lower their Average Sales Price and still maintain their strong margins.

As far as I am aware, Boeing are not the only ones planning production rate increases, though, nor do they currently have the higher production rate.
Latest data I could find shows Boeing reached 35/month for the 737 in January 2012 (source); Airbus has been at 38/month for the A320 family since August 2011 and should have reached 40 in February 2012 (source).

Airbus want to reach 42/month by Q4 2012, Boeing want to reach that rate in 2014.
42
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26522
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 4:33 pm

Quoting anfromme (Reply 153):
As far as I am aware, Boeing are not the only ones planning production rate increases, though, nor do they currently have the higher production rate.

Yes, I believe the A320 production rate has always been higher than the production rate for the 737NG. And that has no doubt helped Airbus secure orders from so many new carriers because they can offer them slots. It's also allowed them to be aggressive on pricing when necessary, just as it is with Boeing now.

Boeing Commercial's margins on average have been stronger than Airbus Commercials the past decade (per financial studies I have seen), so I see it as a positive that Airbus, knowing they have another winner on their hands with the A320neo, are choosing to not chase customers at all costs and are willing to lose some RFPs - even major ones - to improve their margins and raise their ASPs.

I'm also pleased to see Boeing being more aggressive on pricing and willing to sacrifice a bit of margin to win those large RFPs that in the past they might very well have let go.
 
Nicoeddf
Posts: 920
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 7:13 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:16 pm

Quoting SonomaFlyer (Reply 151):

While it is possible for any airline to take delivery and turn around and sell or lease the a/c out

I certainly have no insight to the specific UA A350 acquisiton contract with Airbus, but it is not unheard of, even common, to have clauses in your contracts regarding resale of the aircraft. That is especially true if airlines have received large launch customer discounts.
So, regardless of wet dreams on a.net, it is not just "sell them for profit after delivery because they were so dirt cheap".

And, an counterintuitive fact besides that: Why would another airline pay big money for the A359 of United? Surely they will only do that, if the aircraft is indeed the hell of a machine it is supposed to be.
And then again: Shouldn't United then better fly those damned french plastic planes themselves?   Just think about it...  
Enslave yourself to the divine disguised as salvation
that your bought with your sacrifice
Deception justified for your holy design
High on our platform spewing out your crimes
from the altar of god
 
Daysleeper
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:33 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:47 pm

I’d like to say that I’m surprised by how many posters are speculating a possible 737 order means the cancellation of the A350, but the sad fact is I’m not. What I do find remarkable though is the sound of desperation in some of the posts – God help them the day an American carrier announces an A380 order…..

So back to the actual topic; Do we know if this potential 200 frame order forms part of Boeings predicted 1000 MAX commitments?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26522
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:02 pm

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 156):
So back to the actual topic; Do we know if this potential 200 frame order forms part of Boeings predicted 1000 MAX commitments?

It should not be. Boeing have noted that commitments are between an MoU/LoI and a firm sales contract - the airline has agreed to buy the MAX and placed deposits (likely to secure delivery positions).

UA sounds like they are still negotiating, so this would be a new 737NG and MAX order.
 
fpetrutiu
Posts: 730
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 11:28 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:04 pm

Quoting nicoeddf (Reply 139):
CO management is so much more capable that they wisely see all the mistakes in UAs evaluation of the A350 and therefore don't have any other concerns but cancelling the A350
Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 156):
So back to the actual topic; Do we know if this potential 200 frame order forms part of Boeings predicted 1000 MAX commitments?

That 1000 count dates back to January 2012. I think they were not included since at the time Airbus was still in the running. They should be well over 1200 by now. In the Q1 results call they stated that: "Commercial Airplanes booked 412 net orders during the quarter, including 301 firm orders for the 737 MAX. Backlog remains strong with more than 4,000 airplanes valued at a record $308 billion."
Florin
Orlando, FL
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:08 pm

I think the speculation of canceling the A350 order should be reserved for a different thread. But I do want to comment on some things that do not seem like correct assumptions at all.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 141):
Since UAL already OWNS 3 A330's that have NEVER seen a United Hangar I would not Doubt that UAL LEASING could find good and Profitable Homes for all 25 of the A350's if they don't like them.

I don't think owning A330s has anything to do with what they will operate. They own those because of financial collateral from Air Canada. There was never intention to operate them unlike the A350s.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 149):
Could UA transfer some of their delivery slots to other airlines? In other words sell their A350's to say US and take the penalties which would still be there, but they will not be on the hook for the orders and Airbus would still get the money for the aircraft.

Typically not. UA would not be able to profit out of reselling airplanes as they would be configured to the wrong specifications and rework costs are quite high. The manufacturers cracked down on that practice after Ryanair essentially did that with 738s. Essentially UA would find it easier to cancel the orders rather than resell them. Airbus does not want that happening and contracts prevent it. The only times airplanes in any signficant quantity get resold are because of serious financial problems. I am not talking about switching of 2 747s from NW to UA or a few other small transactions. A 25 airplane order is a big commitment.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
charlienorth
Posts: 1068
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:24 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:22 pm

Quoting nicoeddf (Reply 155):
Shouldn't United then better fly those damned french plastic planes themselves? Just think about it...

  

Too many fan boys on this site and most do not know their @ss from a hole in the ground on the A vs B thing..put on a blind fold get your carcass on an airplane and tell me what you are flying in!
Work hard fly right..don't understand it
 
User avatar
drerx7
Posts: 4386
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2000 12:19 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri Apr 27, 2012 9:12 pm

Quoting charlienorth (Reply 160):
Too many fan boys on this site and most do not know their @ss from a hole in the ground on the A vs B thing..put on a blind fold get your carcass on an airplane and tell me what you are flying in!

  
HOUSTON, TEXAS
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6561
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:34 am

This constant drumbeat about the supposed cancellation of the A350 is off topic and is making my head hurt.   

The issue here is whether UA is about to order a [expletive]-ton of 737s. A fun topic to speculate on (and I would bet in favor of it, given post-merger UA's current fleet) but absolutely unrelated to the A350.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6955
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:38 am

Quoting anfromme (Reply 147):
True. Reminds me of how for a few years, every time a SIA order was discussed, people on a.net started coming up with all kinds of scenarios of how they were going to drop the A345s and buy 772LRs instead.

You can substitute A380 for A345 and 748i for 772LR in that sentence, and it would still be valid

Quoting anfromme (Reply 153):
Latest data I could find shows Boeing reached 35/month for the 737 in January 2012 (source); Airbus has been at 38/month for the A320 family since August 2011 and should have reached 40 in February 2012

At a more cumulative level, Airbus delivered 420 A320's last year, and Boeing delivered 400 737's - a net difference of about 5%

Quoting Stitch (Reply 154):
Boeing Commercial's margins on average have been stronger than Airbus Commercials the past decade (per financial studies I have seen),

Although care needs to be taken, as the programmes are accounted differently, with Airbus taking exceptional overruns on the A380, original A350 and A400M on the nose up front, whilst Boeing bury those across the "programme" based on an assumed total sales - so the figures won't be apples-for-apples

Rgds
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4054
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:02 am

Quoting PHXA340 (Reply 144):

WWill fly the
A350 but it Won't displace the B777, be ause the 777 has Porven itself repeatedly. I said if they Don't like it they can always Lease them out.

The A321 it appears is TOO underpowered and lacking performance to replace the B757 and 30 of the 97 -222's are Etops . and the 900er or the Max -9 would be more logical for flexibility as they are already ETOPS
There seems to be a fixation on this board that BIGGER is somehow Better. or Longer range is superior. Where is it in the World that you Can't get to?? because an airplane is SAID to fly 9000 miles do you NEED to?? Longer range Bigger Wings Etc. all that means is Less flexibility in missions and Where it can be flown. We have to watch right Now because the 757's with winglets just can't park at every airport gate with the spacing. so there are added pressures to having MADE the upgrade as well.
I never see any thought as to infrastructure or How stuff happens. It's like you guys Magically expect it TO happen because you think it's a darn good Idea.. Why is that?? I see a lot of A380 fans for an airplane that ddn'tt appear to have a lot of forethought. Now that we Have this Behemoth?? Where are you going to Park it??Or were double decker Gates supposed to Spring up like Weeds??
 
User avatar
USAF336TFS
Posts: 1362
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:27 am

None of us really knows for sure what UA will/will not order/cancel/revisit, so criticism of anyone's opinion doesn't add to the discussion.
All we know, as of right now, is that a 200 737 order is looking as quite possible, according to the article. As was mentioned, we should return to topic. But whether or not you agree with someone's opinion, doesn't mean you're right and they're wrong.

Starting to sound like the KC-X discussions.
336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
 
Cerecl
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:22 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:29 am

strfyr51, please do us a favour and refrain from randomly capitalise your post.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 164):
WWill fly the
A350 but it Won't displace the B777, be ause the 777 has Porven itself repeatedly

This makes no sense. The 777s in UA fleet will be displaced/replaced eventually, if not by A350, then by 787-9. That is the whole point of having newer generation aircrafts.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 164):
The A321 it appears is TOO underpowered and lacking performance to replace the B757

What about A321neo? It is perhaps the closest we will get to a 757.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 164):
There seems to be a fixation on this board that BIGGER is somehow Better. or Longer range is superior. Where is it in the World that you Can't get to?? because an airplane is SAID to fly 9000 miles do you NEED to?? Longer range Bigger Wings Etc. all that means is Less flexibility in missions and Where it can be flown.

Right, both Boeing and Airbus must be daydreaming when they designed 787/A350, look at their range!

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 164):
I never see any thought as to infrastructure or How stuff happens. It's like you guys Magically expect it TO happen because you think it's a darn good Idea.. Why is that?? I see a lot of A380 fans for an airplane that ddn'tt appear to have a lot of forethought. Now that we Have this Behemoth?? Where are you going to Park it??Or were double decker Gates supposed to Spring up like Weeds??

How is A380 relevant in a thread about narrowbodies?

I think we may have a better idea about UA's narrowbody strategy when the subtypes and break down of firm vs options of this order, assuming it goes to Boeing, becomes known. If the order is mostly 737-8MAX with no 737-9MAX, then there is a possibility Airbus may still have a chance. If the order contains a mix of 737-8 and 9, one has to assume that UA has ordered their last A320 family aircraft.
As to the A350. It would be mad for UA to cancel the order now as we have no idea if 787-9 or A350 will stick to their current schedules or perform to spec. However, I don't think it is beyond the realm of possibility that the order may be cancelled eventually and replaced by a combination of 787-9 and 10, particularly if it becomes clear UA has no interest in A32xneo.
Fokker-100 SAAB 340 Q400 E190 717 737 738 763ER 787-8 772 77E 773 77W 747-400 747-400ER A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A346 A359 A380
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18424
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:18 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 152):
By increasing the production rate, Boeing is able to lower their production costs, so they can lower their Average Sales Price and still maintain their strong margins.

It's been successful with the 777 and 767, and it looks like it will also be successful on the 737.

A very important point. IMHO, Boeing will use the low per unit production costs to lease 737NGs on shorter leases yet still make a profit. That is an easy way to bridge the line. Then, once the MAX is in production, they have certain customers for the improved 737.

It isn't that Airbus isn't boosting production. Its a race to stay competitive with each other.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sun Apr 29, 2012 1:49 am

Quoting ua76heavy (Reply 109):
That was before the merger. Now that CO's management is in the driver's seat, it's a brand new game.

Incorrect. The CURRENT UA management has said it.

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 130):
PIANO X is using an EIS OEW of 120.792t. for the 788. Based on the 242 passenger standard max range is 7140nm
If and when they get down to 116t the max range will get to about 7700nm. My impression was that the DOW was to be about 116t so if they get rid of often quoted 8t overweight and allow about 4t to bring it up to DOW the 116t number should be about right. To get the 7450nm number the DOW would be about 118t.

Wow I didn't realize it was that bad. An A330-200 can do that.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 132):
What fleet commonality is there between the 787 and 777 other than they are made by the same manufacturer?.

There is ZERO other than the type rating, but that is very nice.

The systems are wildly different.

Quoting Acheron (Reply 134):
But apparently the Airbus pilot pool in UA is nonexistant, according to some people...

You mean other than all the current sUA pilots that fly NBs?

Quoting neutronstar73 (Reply 138):
Perhaps Airbus will succeed in having a reduced training program for the A320-A350 pilots to fly both aircraft. I would think that would be a great benefit...

They have one now. Airbus pilots can covert to a type with a short differences class across all airframes but the A300 and A310.

Quoting Schweigend (Reply 142):
Dear Stir Fry,

This made me laugh out loud.

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 166):
What about A321neo? It is perhaps the closest we will get to a 757.

By a WIDE margin the A321neo will outperform the 737-9MAX. Nearly 400nm according to a recent analysis.

NS
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18424
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:30 am

Quoting gigneil (Reply 168):
By a WIDE margin the A321neo will outperform the 737-9MAX. Nearly 400nm according to a recent analysis.

Which analysis? That would put the A321NEO at TATL range...   

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:52 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 169):
Which analysis? That would put the A321NEO at TATL range...   

Aeroturbopower, which we can debate about bias elsewhere, has put the range of the A319NEO at nearly _4400_ nm with the A321NEO approaching 3750 to 3800nm.

NS
 
columba
Posts: 5232
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:06 am

What many people seem here to forget UA is working with Airbus on the A350 for a long time. They have send their own engineers to Toulouse to discuss the airplane. They will get an airplane designed to their specification just as they did back in the days with the 777. UA will not go all Boeing, they are too big for that.

Also the history argument does not count. Although founded with the help of Boeing back in the days, UA was a strong Douglas customer, even prefering the Dc 8 over the 707.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Mon Apr 30, 2012 8:33 am

Quoting gigneil (Reply 170):
Aeroturbopower, which we can debate about bias elsewhere, has put the range of the A319NEO at nearly _4400_ nm with the A321NEO approaching 3750 to 3800nm.

Airbus issued a complete tech spec spreadsheet as part of a press package sometime Jan-Feb this year called "Airbus Aircraft Family_datatable" which includes all the A320 ranges including the neo models. I have not found it since so I put it on Scribd, it is readable direct of the link, the nm claims are on page 2 (Imperial units):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/91799188

It states the A321neo has a spec (full Pax + bags) range of 3760nm and the 319neo of 4200nm.

So Aeroturbopower is not that far of.
Non French in France
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Mon Apr 30, 2012 5:52 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 168):
Wow I didn't realize it was that bad. An A330-200 can do that.

The way I read the range chart for an A332 is that with a 253 seat load it's range is ~ 6600nm. That is quite a spread from the about 7100nm for an acknowledged overweight EIS 788.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18424
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:16 pm

Quoting gigneil (Reply 170):
Aeroturbopower, which we can debate about bias elsewhere, has put the range of the A319NEO at nearly _4400_ nm with the A321NEO approaching 3750 to 3800nm.

I expect the A321NEO to be at 3600nm to 3750nm at EIS. Later to grow, but not at EIS.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 172):
It states the A321neo has a spec (full Pax + bags) range of 3760nm

I missed that, thank you. If Pratt does exceed fuel burn by 4%, that implies over 3900nm range or marginal TATL!
   We could have our 752 replacement early.   

Note: I combined the two posts as the 3760nm is more than I expect. Yes, you had a good reference, I'm just not certain of the numbers yet.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
nomadd22
Posts: 1570
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:42 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 2:10 am

Quoting astuteman (Reply 163):
Quoting anfromme (Reply 153):
Latest data I could find shows Boeing reached 35/month for the 737 in January 2012 (source); Airbus has been at 38/month for the A320 family since August 2011 and should have reached 40 in February 2012

At a more cumulative level, Airbus delivered 420 A320's last year, and Boeing delivered 400 737's - a net difference of about 5%

Isn't the Airbus year only 11 months long?
Anon
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 7:01 am

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 173):
The way I read the range chart for an A332 is that with a 253 seat load it's range is ~ 6600nm. That is quite a spread from the about 7100nm for an acknowledged overweight EIS 788.

Well that seems to have changed, the Airbus document I referenced above now states 7250nm for the 238t variant with 253 Pax+Bags @95,0 kg each. Boeings 788 Web says 7650nm for 250 Pax+Bags @95,25 kg each. The 788 carries 223kg less which if transferred to fuel for the 332 would give it another 50nm.

So we compare apples to apples 332 7300nm against the 788 7650nm. The 332 burns more fuel however, in the order of 11% more per nm flown.
Non French in France
 
Daysleeper
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:33 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 8:34 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 174):
I missed that, thank you. If Pratt does exceed fuel burn by 4%, that implies over 3900nm range or marginal TATL!
We could have our 752 replacement early.


I’m struggling to find a referance at the moment, but there has been a recent 200NM range bump for the A321NEO which was applicable to BOTH engine types. As you say if Pratt really do have a little left in the bag then the P&W equipped A321 could be a TATL bird right out of the box.

Of course, as this is an Airbus it couldn’t possibly replace the 752. Boeing need to re-open a defunct line and produce a 30 year old design that nobody wanted in order for that to happen  

[Edited 2012-05-01 01:36:50]
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 3:36 pm

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 177):
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 174):
I missed that, thank you. If Pratt does exceed fuel burn by 4%, that implies over 3900nm range or marginal TATL!
We could have our 752 replacement early.


I’m struggling to find a referance at the moment, but there has been a recent 200NM range bump for the A321NEO which was applicable to BOTH engine types. As you say if Pratt really do have a little left in the bag then the P&W equipped A321 could be a TATL bird right out of the box.

Out of curiousity, do either of you know what configuration those range quotes are in? Boeing quotes the 3900nm range including reserves, but in still air and at a max takeoff weight & full fuel tanks configuration which in reality is a very payload restricted configuration. In reality the 757's practical maximum range is 3400~3500nm.

What configuration is Airbus proposing?

I also find it interesting that the biggest operator of 757s across the Atlantic seems to be rejecting the A321NEO.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 3:53 pm

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 178):
Out of curiousity, do either of you know what configuration those range quotes are in? Boeing quotes the 3900nm range including reserves, but in still air and at a max takeoff weight & full fuel tanks configuration which in reality is a very payload restricted configuration. In reality the 757's practical maximum range is 3400~3500nm.

The standard range quotes for both OEMs as we understand it (which in A.net speak is the spec range = showroom range ) is with ACAP seating, max Pax load and their bags (Airbus allocates 95.0 kg per Pax+bags, Boeing 220lb = 95.25 kg). No cargo. Reserves: 5% trip fuel, 200nm diversion and 45 minutes holding at 15000ft. There is no DOW allowance, just spec OEW + maxPaxnoCargo + fuel = MTOW.

Given the rather stringent definition of the "spec" range one can count backwards and plot MZFW range reasonably well as well as max fuel range. Ferry range is harder but not very interesting.
Non French in France
 
phxa340
Posts: 1068
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 4:19 pm

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 177):
I’m struggling to find a referance at the moment, but there has been a recent 200NM range bump for the A321NEO which was applicable to BOTH engine types. As you say if Pratt really do have a little left in the bag then the P&W equipped A321 could be a TATL bird right out of the box.
Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 177):
Of course, as this is an Airbus it couldn’t possibly replace the 752.

You definitely harbor some animosity there buddy. For every Boeing fanboy there is an Airbus fanboy. You are assuming that P&W will kill it with fuel burn and GE comes up with a dog. Lets give GE some time to see what they come up with and lets see if the P&W is the masterpeice people make it seem. The reality is wether it is a Boeing or an Airbus, the fact is neither the A321NEO or the 737-9 will be a true 757 replacement off the bat. They will be brilliant at replacement the vast majority of 75 flying but as far at as TATL ... maybe after a few years in service. The current 737NG is ~10% more efficient than the first models which has helped its range , I see Airbus consistantly improving the 320 line as well making TATL possible years after the NEO launch.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18424
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 5:41 pm

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 177):
I’m struggling to find a referance at the moment, but there has been a recent 200NM range bump for the A321NEO which was applicable to BOTH engine types. As you say if Pratt really do have a little left in the bag then the P&W equipped A321 could be a TATL bird right out of the box.

   My best sources are being *very* quiet (in other words, respecting NDAs). However, about two years ago they babbled on about a variety of changes Airbus was considering to further increase the A321NEO range. The focus is definitively on the A321NEO for TATL as US was (is?) willing to be a *large* customer but is insisting on TATL range with guarantees (read steep penalties that place the *entire* cost of range risk on Airbus and the engine vendor selected); in other words, Airbus/Pratt will not commit to US's demands until they have some 'range margin in the bank.' However, US will not wait forever before ordering. My rumor mill has insisted in the past (over a year old discussion) that Boeing/GE are working on a 738MAX with TATL range as a counter proposal.

Note: Airbus is not going to side with any engine vendor with *any* order. However, my 'rumor mill' believes Pratt will be willing to improve fuel burn guarantees for this one order, but needs more flight test data before committing due to the extreme cost penalties.

Note: Things will have changed in a year. But the next generation TATL narrowbody launch customer will be able to 'drive the show.' A year ago, US was in the driver's seat. However, it is reasonable to speculate that UA and Boeing/GE came to an agreement that includes a TATL version (again, rumors I'm hearing is a 738MAX, not a 739MAX). The difference is, per rumor, US wants an earlier TATL EIS. (In other words, UA is willing to wait a few more years for the MAX to mature.)

Quoting Daysleeper (Reply 177):
Of course, as this is an Airbus it couldn’t possibly replace the 752. Boeing need to re-open a defunct line and produce a 30 year old design that nobody wanted in order for that to happen

Of course. We all know that.  

I wish I had a source on how the sharklets were doing in flight test.   In particular drag at high weights to allow for a fuel load increase. e.g., remove the issues B6 had with the ACT not improving range of their A320s at high payloads!   

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 178):
I also find it interesting that the biggest operator of 757s across the Atlantic seems to be rejecting the A321NEO.

What are the stats for TATL 752 flights? In other words, how many daily (or weekly) by UA/CO, AA, US, BA, etc. I would assume UA/CO is whom you are referring too (it is a UA thread and combined they are a large 752 TATL operator). IMHO, the 738MAX will make more profit per TATL flight than the 752. I've been hearing rumors about such an option for a while. I would be shocked if UA/CO orders the MAX without a 738 (or 739ERMAX) version that is TATL capable.

My rumor mill insists US is *very* interested in a TATL A321NEO. While probably not the largest TATL operator, I suspect they will grow. If either the larger (larger than 73G/319) MAX or NEO meets the 752 range (under similar restrictions), they will both sell due to the tremendous CASM and cost per flight reduction.


Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 7:02 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 181):
What are the stats for TATL 752 flights? In other words, how many daily (or weekly) by UA/CO, AA, US, BA

Can't speak for the others, but BA have completely retired the 757 from their fleet, and it was never big on their transatlantic routes.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 7:28 pm

Quoting sunrisevalley (Reply 173):
The way I read the range chart for an A332 is that with a 253 seat load it's range is ~ 6600nm. That is quite a spread from the about 7100nm for an acknowledged overweight EIS 788.

The range of the current highest TOW is 7200nm. I am not sure what date that EIS will happen or whether the range charts are updated until it hits the runway.

There are several being built now, however.

NS
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Tue May 01, 2012 9:39 pm

Quoting ferpe (Reply 176):
So we compare apples to apples 332 7300nm against the 788 7650nm. The 332 burns more fuel however, in the order of 11% more per nm flown.

Thanks for the link. I depend on the ACAP sheets. While the 238t 332 is shown as WV-058 in these there is no L/R chart for this variant in the sheets dated Jan 1/2012
 
ord
Posts: 1406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 1999 10:34 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri May 04, 2012 2:44 am

From Reuters: United puts final touches on major Boeing 737 order: sources.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...s-ual-boeing-idUSBRE84304D20120504
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1812
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri May 04, 2012 7:38 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 181):
If either the larger (larger than 73G/319) MAX or NEO meets the 752 range (under similar restrictions), they will both sell due to the tremendous CASM and cost per flight reduction.

How good (or how efficient) would the new reengined NB's be against e.g. the 787?
I mean regarding CASM on TATL routes.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 1035
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri May 04, 2012 10:25 am

Quoting columba (Reply 171):
UA was a strong Douglas customer, even prefering the Dc 8 over the 707.

IIRC UA wanted 6 across in coach and Boeing said no, Douglas said yes. UA went with Douglas. Boeing changed their mind and widened the plane, but too late for UA.

The stretched DC8-6x was much better than 707 economically.

There was no Boeing equivalent of the DC-10.

I think UA had a Boeing preference, but not blindly so.

Another minor fact to remember is that PMUA never ordered a GE engine after UA232.

Speaking of which - any word when the PMUA 787s are going to switch to GE power? I saw AvWeek says the PMUA planes are officially undecided, even though the original order announcement press release said RR.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26522
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri May 04, 2012 1:36 pm

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 186):
How good (or how efficient) would the new reengined NB's be against e.g. the 787?
I mean regarding CASM on TATL routes.

I would expect poor when comparing full planes, but a full 737-8 versus a half-filled 787-8 might favor the 737-8, especially on a daily basis.
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2208
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri May 04, 2012 1:41 pm

Quoting ADent (Reply 187):
Speaking of which - any word when the PMUA 787s are going to switch to GE power? I saw AvWeek says the PMUA planes are officially undecided, even though the original order announcement press release said RR.

It makes no sense to have two different engine types on the new 787's going to UA. That would mean two different sets of spares, training and frankly, expense. We'll see an announcement of GE selections for the sUA 787's closer to the scheduled delivery of their first a/c.
 
United1
Posts: 3887
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri May 04, 2012 1:46 pm

Quoting ADent (Reply 187):
Speaking of which - any word when the PMUA 787s are going to switch to GE power? I saw AvWeek says the PMUA planes are officially undecided, even though the original order announcement press release said RR.

UA never announced on a engine type for the 787s...the only engine type they announced was the RRs for the 350's.

Quoting ADent (Reply 187):
I think UA had a Boeing preference, but not blindly so.

If it was Boeing and they could strap a Pratt onto it UA had a tendency to buy it.
I know the voices in my head aren't real but sometimes their ideas are just awesome!!!
 
srbmod
Posts: 15446
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: Bloomberg: UA Discussing 200 NB Order With Boeing

Fri May 04, 2012 6:54 pm

With this thread getting close to 200 posts and there being a new thread started on this same subject that has already garnered a number of posts, this thread will now be locked and the discussion continued here:

Reuters: UA Puts Final Touches On Major 737 Order (by catiii May 3 2012 in Civil Aviation)

Any posts that appear after this locking message will be deleted for housekeeping purposes.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos