Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
neromancer
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 11:23 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 4:59 am

Quoting Okcflyer (Reply 199):
In terms of weight, see the below from Wikipedia. I haven't seen empty weights yet but the delta should be in the 5-6-7% range in favor of E2.

E2-190
Maximum takeoff weight 56,900 kg (125,400 lb)
Maximum landing weight 49,450 kg (109,020 lb)
Max payload weight 13,080 kg (28,840 lb)
Maximum range 5,186 km (2,800 nmi)

CS100
Maximum takeoff weight (MTOW)60,781 kg (133,999 lb) 7% E2-190
Maximum landing weight (MLW)52,390 kg (115,500 lb) 6% E2-190
Maximum payload (total) 15,127 kg (33,349 lb) 15.5% E2-190
Maximum range 5,741 km (3,100 nmi)


Keep in mind the CS100 has an 11% higher seating capacity increase over the E2-190 (108 [38-32 pitch] vs. 97 [38-31 pitch] in a standard two class configuration).

While UA would likely introduce a premium economy and might do a couple of other things to get the seating down to 100 seats in a CS100 (like take one of the 3 seat rows out to better fit a second lav in the rear) the introduction of premium economy in the E2-190 would drop the seating down to around 93 seats (which so happens to be a 7% difference).

[Edited 2015-12-19 21:01:26]
 
User avatar
AAlaxfan
Posts: 711
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 7:08 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 7:24 am

Quoting JoKeR (Reply 193):
OR! or,compare the ability to successfully produce a genuine 100+ seat jet with a solid track record - so much so that it warrants a second generation of the same type - ala MAX and Neo...

So your comparing 2nd generation aircraft to clean sheet. I completely understand your logic. A320 , B737 NEO,CEO, MAX series to A350, B787. Yup makes sense. Apples to Oranges.

Yes EMB has a track record of sales in type, but so did Boeing with 737 vs A320. Look what's happened between those two.

[Edited 2015-12-19 23:28:13]
My favorite airport is the one I'm flying to! :airplane:
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7472
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 7:45 am

Quoting Okcflyer (Reply 199):
The only argument is fleet flexibility but in this case United has plenty of aircraft to handle those needs and so there is no value in abusing a heavier more capable frame on dominantly short sectors.

Because that plane can do OKC-IAH, turn, and then do IAH-GYE (if they choose to reopen the route); or GEG-ORD-CCS; or RIC-EWR-Bristol. Very flexible aircraft, one pilot group. More cargo potential than the E2. And can open, or reopen, routes that are too small for the current fleet to profitably handle.
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 2396
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 1:54 pm

Quoting Okcflyer (Reply 199):
CS100
Maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) 60,781 kg (133,999 lb) 7% E2-190

That's the max weight version. The Base CS100 has an MTOW of 121,000 lbs / 54 tonnes, nearly six tonnes less than the HGW. I guess BBD will highlight the Base version to UA if they want a shorter-range variant.
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
kaneporta1
Posts: 741
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:22 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 4:56 pm

Quoting Okcflyer (Reply 199):
The point I am making is with the "large regional" business model, flying from central hubs up to 1500 miles out, the lighter less capable airplane generally pencils out better. It's better optimized for the segments.
Quoting Okcflyer (Reply 199):
Most city pairs are within the 1500 mile radius. What is the point in flying 3,000 mile capable frames when you're never pushing the range?

You seem to be unaware of the existence of payload/range charts. This is much more relevant to the capability of the aircraft. I have now idea how or where UA is planning on using those new airplanes, but the publicly quoted ranges mean next to nothing.
I'd rather die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather, not terrified and screaming, like his passengers
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2133
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:00 pm

As part of the TA with ALPA, CS100 pay rates now exist (assuming the TA passes the MEC and membership voting, that is).

I would guess that's good news for Bombardier.
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 10:30 pm

Quoting FlyHossD (Reply 205):
I would guess that's good news for Bombardier.

Also the fact that UA didn't make a move (publicly anyway) for the 20 AC E190s that Boeing has had available for quite a while. I doubt they could have found a better cost effective way of acquiring a 100-seater in a rather short time period. Even when DL supposedly scored the E190s and then backed out of the deal and then later on decided to take them again didn't cause UA to blink. They've been very, very patient with this whole process.

I'd say it looks very good for Bombardier actually. Add to that, it might work out for Bombardier to find a home for the CS300s that Republic has on order since they can't fly them as an express carrier under scope. Even though the CS300 doesn't allow for an increase in 76-seat flying, it brings an efficient 120-seater into the fleet that would have crew commonality with the CS100.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2563
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:39 pm

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 206):
Even though the CS300 doesn't allow for an increase in 76-seat flying, it brings an efficient 120-seater into the fleet that would have crew commonality with the CS100.

Im confused I thought it did
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:22 am

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 207):
Im confused I thought it did

This is the wording from the document I have...assuming it's the latest version.

"1-L-25 “New Small Narrowbody Aircraft” means a CS100, E190 or E195 aircraft, provided that
such aircraft is neither in the Company Fleet as of the date of signing of this Agreement nor
acquired through merger or acquisition of another air carrier."
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2563
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 4:35 am

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 208):

"1-L-25 “New Small Narrowbody Aircraft” means a CS100, E190 or E195 aircraft, provided that
such aircraft is neither in the Company Fleet as of the date of signing of this Agreement nor
acquired through merger or acquisition of another air carrier."

Would the union fight the airline if they ordered both, and used both to raise uax fleet cap? I don't see that as fight worth fighting. Plus I would expect UA to negotiate a side letter if they feel this would be brought up.
 
FlyHossD
Posts: 2133
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:45 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 10:30 am

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 208):
"1-L-25 “New Small Narrowbody Aircraft” means a CS100, E190 or E195 aircraft, provided that
such aircraft is neither in the Company Fleet as of the date of signing of this Agreement nor
acquired through merger or acquisition of another air carrier."
Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 209):
Would the union fight the airline if they ordered both, and used both to raise uax fleet cap? I don't see that as fight worth fighting. Plus I would expect UA to negotiate a side letter if they feel this would be brought up.

There may be a reason for ALPA to fight it. IF the CS300 were to replace the 737-700s and A319s at a lesser pay rate (which appears to be the case from the proposed pay tables), you wouldn't expect ALPA or it's membership to accept $40-$50 less per hour for the same "job", would you?
My statements do not represent my former employer or my current employer and are my opinions only.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14221
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 1:56 pm

Quoting FlyHossD (Reply 210):
There may be a reason for ALPA to fight it. IF the CS300 were to replace the 737-700s and A319s at a lesser pay rate (which appears to be the case from the proposed pay tables), you wouldn't expect ALPA or it's membership to accept $40-$50 less per hour for the same "job", would you?

I too thought the CS300 was covered under "new small mainline" criteria, but when you put it into that perspective it makes sense. But still going with the CS100 makes sense to eventually move to the CS300.

Just thinking Here:

CS100 (new small mainline)
CS300 (eventually replace 73G and A319)
738
739
737MAX (replace A320s)
A321NEO or new Boeing offering to replace 752s and 753s.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
mrocktor
Posts: 1391
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:57 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 2:56 pm

Quoting ytz (Reply 177):
If you're going that far (and incurring that high a trip cost), in most cases, it'll pay to upgauge and increase revenue potential.

The relevant variable when deciding to upgauge is not range, it is frequency. Assuming you have a small plane with the range for a given route, you upgage if and only if the increased profitability per seat is enough to offset the loss of frequency (which is a significant competitive disadvantage).

Quoting TheRedBaron (Reply 196):
its the perfect 100 seater

... as long as you don't need things like 1. an established and nation wide support and service organization, 2. reliable aircraft and parts sourcing independent of geopolitical turmoil. Or, in other words, not perfect at all.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:03 pm

Quoting FlyHossD (Reply 210):
you wouldn't expect ALPA or it's membership to accept $40-$50 less per hour for the same "job", would you?

Based on the way things are now, I would certainly hope not. Being in business, it is obvious that labor definitely plays a roll in expenses. But I am a bit incredulous when it comes to claims that raising pilot pay by say, some $150/trip dooms the flight to bankruptcy when the jet has 75 seats on it. That makes no economic sense to me. What does one cancelled flight for lack of crew actually cost plus the loss of goodwill from the customer.

I'm curious where the whole idea of pay is related to the size of aircraft came from? From a pilot's perspective, is it more challenging to fly the larger aircraft? Is it based strictly because there are more souls on board? Was it something that got established historically and has just stuck? Who is more in favor of that system, the company or the pilot group?
 
B737900ER
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 9:38 pm

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 213):
I'm curious where the whole idea of pay is related to the size of aircraft came from?

I was curious about the same thing. Every other work group gets paid the same regardless of what aircraft they may be working, and have to work several different types throughout any given day. So what makes the pilots different?
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 9:49 pm

Quoting B737900ER (Reply 214):
I was curious about the same thing. Every other work group gets paid the same regardless of what aircraft they may be working, and have to work several different types throughout any given day. So what makes the pilots different?

I think it is perhaps mainly a carryover from when larger jets required more knowledge and experience to fly (which has been rendered moot with FBW and current commonality cockpit design).

I think that pilot pay should be based on work performed. Something along the concept of flight time multiplied by the number of flights or some such calculation.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
DualQual
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:10 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Mon Dec 21, 2015 11:35 pm

I believe it has always extended back to bigger planes tended to generate more revenue/profit so that flying tended to pay more. A 747 flying from SFO to TYO was generating more potential profit for the company than a 727 going from ORD to OMA. So that's the way it got negotiated and that's pretty much the way it is still today.
There's no known cure for stupid
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:40 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 211):
I too thought the CS300 was covered under "new small mainline" criteria, but when you put it into that perspective it makes sense. But still going with the CS100 makes sense to eventually move to the CS300.

I agree. I believe both the CS100 and CS300 are perfect for UA. The CS100 obviously satisfying their 100 seated need, while the CS300 could be used to replace the A319s and 737-700s, as mentioned.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 211):
Just thinking Here:

CS100 (new small mainline)
CS300 (eventually replace 73G and A319)
738
739
737MAX (replace A320s)
A321NEO or new Boeing offering to replace 752s and 753s.

Just what I was thinking too, like I stated in reply 194.

CS100 (Small Mainline)
CS300 (A319/737-700 Replacement)
737-800
737 MAX 8 (A320 Replacement)
737-900
737-900ER
737 MAX 9 (Replacing Domestic 757s)

And as for the A321neo or NSA/MoM, I think it will go either way. UA could get the A321neo years before the NSA/MoM, but UA could, then again, be a launch customer for that type.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
User avatar
airzim
Posts: 1472
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2001 7:40 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 1:59 am

Quoting DualQual (Reply 216):
I believe it has always extended back to bigger planes tended to generate more revenue/profit so that flying tended to pay more. A 747 flying from SFO to TYO was generating more potential profit for the company than a 727 going from ORD to OMA. So that's the way it got negotiated and that's pretty much the way it is still today.

Unlikely, bigger planes are generally smaller fleets. As pilots age, and given seniority rules, it's a lot cheaper for the company to pay higher rates for their smallish long haul wide body fleet versus paying everyone the same rates regardless of the airplane. By paying higher per hour rates for a very difficult line to hold, given seniority, it forces pilots to bid wide body closer to retirement with typically a very small numbers of years at those rates. That saves the company lost of money, because long block times, longer required rest times, and less trips per month, compared to their narrowbody brethren.

In fact you could argue the pilot doing multiple take off and landings in a day is doing way more work (with more risk) than the guys flying on a 14 hour nonstop to Tokyo. There's really no justification for paying widebody pilots more money. It's all way for the airlines to save money by fencing the fleet based on size.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14221
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 12:38 pm

Just to demonstrate how much UA needs a new 100 seater, looking at an OAG from 1999 on Departflights.com I see CO had 67(!) daily 735 flights from EWR.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 2:09 pm

Quoting DualQual (Reply 216):

I might argue that pilots who fly bigger frames do get paid more. The bigger planes have more range (more flying hours capable) and thus pilots get to their cap faster with less work. Maybe airlines should put in a TO/L per diem for 'shuttle' type pilots?
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
bjorn14
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 2:11 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 2:14 pm

Quoting DualQual (Reply 216):

I might argue that pilots who fly bigger frames do get paid more. The bigger planes have more range (more flying hours capable) and thus pilots get to their cap faster with less work. Maybe airlines should put in a TO/L per diem for 'shuttle' type pilots?
"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
 
mrocktor
Posts: 1391
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:57 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:31 pm

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 213):
Was it something that got established historically and has just stuck?

This.

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 213):
Who is more in favor of that system, the company or the pilot group?

The pilot group. Who wants to get paid for performance when you can just show up and get raises? It is short sighted, and creates a perverse incentive for companies to dump their senior pilots (because you can get younger pilots who are substantially cheaper but only slightly less effective). But pilot unions are adamant about opposing any sort of performance measurement (up to and including monitoring for risky or unsafe behavior).

Quoting airzim (Reply 218):
In fact you could argue the pilot doing multiple take off and landings in a day is doing way more work (with more risk) than the guys flying on a 14 hour nonstop to Tokyo.

You are absolutely right. More importantly, the guys and gals flying the first generation CRJ-200s are doing a heck of a lot more work per flight cycle than the folks driving a 787.

The difficult problem is that pilot "quality" is hard to quantify, and especially hard because no one is even trying. The seniority and airplane size system sucks, but it does create a career path. Humans need to see progress and to have long term goals in order to dedicate themselves to a career, so this is important. There has to be a better system though. There is a reason seniority based systems only thrive in government work.
 
sldispatcher
Posts: 432
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 3:55 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 219):
Just to demonstrate how much UA needs a new 100 seater, looking at an OAG from 1999 on Departflights.com I see CO had 67(!) daily 735 flights from EWR.

That is amazing. Wonder when an announcement will be made?

Is flight attendant issue any hindrance to purchasing a new aircraft or would they just be staffed under the sCO rules? If so, that would put more FA's under the sCO contract swinging more votes that way.

Interesting and exciting to see this unfold.
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 14221
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:04 pm

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 223):
That is amazing. Wonder when an announcement will be made?

Here's a sampling of some of their 735 offerings in 1999 from EWR:

Birmingham AL, Buffalo, Charleston SC, Charlotte, Chicago Midway, Cincinnati, Columbus OH, Daytona Beach, Detroit, Greensboro NC, Indianapolis, Jacksonville FL, Kansas City, Manchester NH, Memphis TN, Minneapolis, Montreal, Myrtle Beach, Nashville, New Orleans, Norfolk, Providence, Raleigh, Richmond, Rochester NY, Saint Louis, Salt Lake City, Toronto, Washington National.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
ndhair37
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:06 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 4:11 pm

I'm sure United will be very happy to take advantage of the low prices. The C Series is something of an unknown quantity to many people so perhaps the idea of 2 + 3 will make a lot of people happy.

At the end of the day it comes down to product for the passenger and economics for the operator. Clearly the use of a 737-700 or an A318 is stupid given the full-size engines and higher purchase price when you can take a CS100 or CS300, enjoy the short field operations options (it's a shame that Jets aren't allowed at Billy Bishop as that could have been an attractive route from EWR and ORD...) and use an aircraft that fellow Star carrier LX are apparently very happy with so far.
 
User avatar
jetblastdubai
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:23 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 6:57 pm

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 223):
Is flight attendant issue any hindrance to purchasing a new aircraft or would they just be staffed under the sCO rules? If so, that would put more FA's under the sCO contract swinging more votes that way.

Excellent point. If any new aircraft type that enters the fleet would fall under the sUA FA contract, UA might not want to do anything that would tip the scales away from a sCO-type contract they're trying to get. Holding off on a new, small narrowbody airplane order might make total sense in that regard.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 7:35 pm

Quoting sldispatcher (Reply 223):
That is amazing.
Quoting STT757 (Reply 224):
Here's a sampling of some of their 735 offerings in 1999 from EWR:

Birmingham AL, Buffalo, Charleston SC, Charlotte, Chicago Midway, Cincinnati, Columbus OH, Daytona Beach, Detroit, Greensboro NC, Indianapolis, Jacksonville FL, Kansas City, Manchester NH, Memphis TN, Minneapolis, Montreal, Myrtle Beach, Nashville, New Orleans, Norfolk, Providence, Raleigh, Richmond, Rochester NY, Saint Louis, Salt Lake City, Toronto, Washington National.

Of course, the industry was a wee bit different pre-911 and all the consolidation during the past 16 years.

Quoting ndhair37 (Reply 225):
that could have been an attractive route from EWR and ORD

Both are currently served by Q400's out of Toronto Island.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
B737900ER
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 7:45 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 224):

To add to the list there have been a few routes after 1999 that were flown out of EWR on the 737-500. TUS, ABQ, and SLC come to mind. Not to mention the terminal A shuttle BOS, DCA, DFW, MDW, ATL, that was flown exclusively with the 737-500. There is a certain versatility that a mainline 100 seat aircraft adds to the operation
 
ndhair37
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:06 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 7:48 pm

Quoting planemaker (Reply 227):

Yes, Porter might offer the route but wouldn't UA wish to compete using an airport akin to LCY instead of something like LHR. It might seem trivial but if you're a J passenger with *A then you would likely wish to use the most convenient airport for YYZ to IAD, EWR or ORD; especially if continuing on to regional airports in the MidWest, East or South America?
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 8559
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 7:59 pm

Quoting jetblue1965 (Reply 97):
Quoting STT757 (Reply 219):
Just to demonstrate how much UA needs a new 100 seater, looking at an OAG from 1999 on Departflights.com I see CO had 67(!) daily 735 flights from EWR.

Back in 98 or 99 I flew a 735 from EWR-ORF and around the same time (maybe 97) I flew a 732 from EWR-CHS. Both are examples of mid-size cities that used to have mainline service with CO, but saw nothing but ERJ-145s for about 15 years. It's crazy when you think about it.

Quoting B737900ER (Reply 228):
terminal A shuttle BOS, DCA, DFW, MDW, ATL,

I thought that it was ORD rather than MDW? Either way, it's amazing how much smaller their presence is now on all of those routes, apart from BOS. ATL was a market that went 100% ERJ-145, and has only recently started seeing large RJs, and DCA is all RJ as well. That said, EWR-DCA doesn't make much sense when Amtrak can get you there in a little over two hours.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9307
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:30 pm

Quoting STT757 (Reply 219):
Just to demonstrate how much UA needs a new 100 seater, looking at an OAG from 1999 on Departflights.com I see CO had 67(!) daily 735 flights from EWR.

How does that demonstrate anything? It's a totally different industry today than it was 16 years ago.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:34 pm

Quoting ndhair37 (Reply 229):
Yes, Porter might offer the route but wouldn't UA wish to compete using an airport akin to LCY instead of something like LHR.

CO did try the route out of Newark for a while but then dropped it. BTW, LCY/LHR is like Toronto Island/Hamilton... not Toronto Island/Pearson.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
jetblue1965
Posts: 5050
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 1:28 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:35 pm

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 230):
That said, EWR-DCA doesn't make much sense when Amtrak can get you there in a little over two hours.

It actually makes very little. Under the best-case (possibly unrealistic) scenarios :

Midtown NY to EWR - 30mins
EWR curbside to pushback - 45 mins
Flight block time - 1hr15
DCA to DC downtown - 15 mins

Assuming everything goes perfectly with no hiccups, that's 2:45. Realistically closer to 3:15. Amtrak Acela from NYP to WAS is 2:50.
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:44 pm

Well the pilot vote that will trigger all this just took a step forward. The UAL MEC passed the contract extension that will trigger this order and it's going to the pilot group now.....and CS100 rates have been added.......
It is always darkest before the sun comes up.
 
UA444
Posts: 3009
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 8:47 pm

I think the wording is new small Narrowbody.

Quoting jetblastdubai (Reply 226):
cellent point. If any new aircraft type that enters the fleet would fall under the sUA FA contract, UA might not want to do anything that would tip the scales away from a sCO-type contract they're trying to get. Holding off on a new, small narrowbody airplane order might make total sense in that regard

Except for the fact that they'd then be pissing off the pilots since they're doing this in exchange for getting an extension on the current contract. And a move like this would further soil relations between the FA's and management.

If they buy 88, make 44 go to each group.
 
diverted
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 3:17 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 9:11 pm

Quoting ndhair37 (Reply 229):
Yes, Porter might offer the route but wouldn't UA wish to compete using an airport akin to LCY instead of something like LHR. It might seem trivial but if you're a J passenger with *A then you would likely wish to use the most convenient airport for YYZ to IAD, EWR or ORD; especially if continuing on to regional airports in the MidWest, East or South America?

They had the opportunity. CO HAD slots at YTZ, for a EWR operation, and they relinquished them.

Quote:
Air Canada, Continental Airlines and Porter Airlines all participated in our 2009 slot allocation process, and each airline received a slot award in June 2010.” Coincident with its announced merger agreement with United Airlines, Continental Airlines, subsequently declined to accept its BBTCA slot award

source: http://www.portstoronto.com/About-TP...ty-Responds-to-WestJet-Report.aspx

http://www.montrealgazette.com/busin...+Toronto+Island/4603682/story.html
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 25084
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Tue Dec 22, 2015 9:21 pm

MEC voted to approve TA 13-7
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2563
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 1:18 am

Quoting planemaker (Reply 227):
Both are currently served by Q400's out of Toronto Island.

Nope, ORD is not served from YTZ. MDW is however

Quoting ndhair37 (Reply 225):
and use an aircraft that fellow Star carrier LX are apparently very happy with so far.

They haven't even received them yet, how can they form an opinion.

Quoting UA444 (Reply 235):
I think the wording is new small Narrowbody.

The wording is key, as this the affect the UAX fleet.

Quoting ual777 (Reply 234):
Well the pilot vote that will trigger all this just took a step forward. The UAL MEC passed the contract extension that will trigger this order and it's going to the pilot group now.....and CS100 rates have been added.......

Anything about CS300 override pay?
 
ual777
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 6:18 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 4:57 am

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 238):
Anything about CS300 override pay?

There were previously CS300 rates. The 100 rates are new.
It is always darkest before the sun comes up.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 5:26 am

Quoting ual777 (Reply 239):
There were previously CS300 rates. The 100 rates are new.

They have the pay rates for BOTH the CS100 and CS300?
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2563
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 5:42 am

Quoting ual777 (Reply 239):
There were previously CS300 rates. The 100 rates are new.

I didn't know that thanks. so a split order isn't out of the question.
 
KD5MDK
Posts: 834
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:05 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 6:45 am

If a CS300 costs more than an A320 / 737, why would UA buy it?
 
UA444
Posts: 3009
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 6:52 am

Quoting KD5MDK (Reply 242):

It costs the same as the 319/73G and is more efficient.
 
UA444
Posts: 3009
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:03 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 6:52 am

Quoting KD5MDK (Reply 242):

Pilot costs are same as the 319/73G and is more efficient.
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 7:37 am

Quoting UA444 (Reply 243):
It costs the same as the 319/73G and is more efficient.

Part of the CSeries problem is that A & B have been undercutting it in price... not with the A319 but the A320! And as per BBD's chart posted earlier, the CS300 has 6% better trip costs... but BBD uses 3 times the current price of fuel. It will be interesting to find out how much UA is grinding BBD.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
DALCE
Posts: 1994
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:45 pm

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 8:05 am

Quoting infiniti329 (Reply 238):
They haven't even received them yet, how can they form an opinion.

I know from a very reliable source that LX-staff and probably also the management did like the LX-livery on the FTV visiting ZRH earlier this year   
flown: F50,F70,CR1,CR2,CR9,223,E75,E90,143,AR8,AR1,733,735,736,73G,738,
753,763,744,77W,788,319,320,321,333,AB6.
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 7472
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 8:51 am

When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
rlwynn
Posts: 1518
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:35 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 10:31 am

If UA oedered 50 new 737-600s (yes Boeing would make them) It would be around $1 billion cheaper than 50 CS100s.
I can drive faster than you
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2563
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

RE: UA Looking For 100-seat Aircraft

Wed Dec 23, 2015 11:02 am

Straight from the UA contract

Quote:

1-C-1-g Number of 76-Seat Aircraft
If the Company adds New Small Narrowbody aircraft to the Company Fleet, then on or
after January 1, 2016, the number of permitted 76-Seat Aircraft may increase from 153 (as
permitted under Section 1-C-1-a-(2)-(c)) up to a total of 223 76-Seat Aircraft, and the
number of permitted 76/70-Seat Aircraft may increase from 255 (as permitted under
Section 1-C-1-a-(2)-(c)) up to a total of 325 76/70-Seat Aircraft, except that once the
number of 76/70-Seat Aircraft exceeds 255, then the number of 70-Seat Aircraft may not
be more than 102. 76-Seat Aircraft (above 153 such Aircraft) may be added on a one 76-
Seat Aircraft for each one and one quarter New Small Narrowbody Aircraft (1:1.25) ratio

It does state a specific aircraft. If it is a combined of CS100 & CS300 order I have doubt will use both to max out the UAX fleet.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

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