United Becomes Airbus's Biggest Client

United Airline · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:00 pm

United Airlines becomes Airbus' biggest client
By Mark Odell in London
Published: March 2 2001 12:27GMT | Last Updated: March 2 2001 12:35GMT

Airbus said on Friday that United Airlines of the US had placed a follow-up order for 15 of its A320 family aircraft, making it the European aircraft maker's largest single customer.

The order, worth around $840m at list prices before any discounts, is for eight 150-seater A320s and seven 124-seater A319s, a derivative of the same aircraft.

United, the world's largest airline, already operates a fleet of 103 A320s and A319s, which it operates mainly on its US domestic network.

The latest deal means the Chicago-based airline has now ordered a total of 192 Airbus aircraft, more than any other carrier.

Out of UAL's 600+ fleet (1000+ after the merger), 192 is not a very large number anyway. And I am pretty sure that UAL will stick to an ALL BOEING fleet for aircraft larger or equal size to a B 757.

I doubt they would go for more Airbus Aircraft for some time, after all the B 727s have retired.

What do you guys think? Smile

Superfly · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:04 pm

When will any US Airline buy an A340?

I'd love to see a Northwest or American Airlines A340! Big thumbs up

An-225 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:05 pm

Sounds pretty cool. Are they ordering those to replace 727's or 737-200's?

Superfly · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:06 pm

Sorry I jumped to conclisions! Embarrassment

I thaught it was United States was biggest client!

Sorry!

CPDC10-30 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:08 pm

United obviously must love the A320 series if they are making follow-on orders. And now with the upcoming acquisition of US Airways, they will have a fleet of A330-300 that fit nicely between the 767 and 777. Don't forget that US Airways has lots of A321, A320 and A319 with many more coming, so the total is much higher than 192 out of 1000. That is why the merger makes sense...the narrowbody fleet will be common.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them keep the 330s. Heck, they might even order more.

ILUV767 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:09 pm

Currently, all Airbuses are replacing just the 727-200s...NOT THE 732s. What we will proably see with the 732 routes is just some equipment shifting to 733s/735s, as more A319s become avalible.

United Airline · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:10 pm

They will be used to replace the B 727s.

For the B 737-200s, they will NOT be leaving for at least 3 to 5 years. They have just gone through heavy maintenance. Besides, there is no replacement for the B 737-200s.

Smile

Guest · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:29 pm

United is going to get rid of the A330s. They don't want them. They will take the A320s. There is no way on this earth they would order A330s. They are ordering more and more Boeings larger than the A320. United seems to be very satisfied with their A320 fleet, AND the rest of the fleet, which consists of all Boeing aircraft. United will not order and Airbus planes larger than the A320 series.

baec777 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:40 pm

American is dealing with Boeing, but no Airbus Aircraft will be in American fleet, not even in around 50 years !!

Baec777 Laugh out loud

CPDC10-30 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:40 pm

United is going to get rid of the A330s

This is very widely speculated around this board. However, do you have any actual source from UA that confirms this?

CPDC10-30 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 2:43 pm

but no Airbus Aircraft will be in American fleet, not even in around 50 years

Sorry, bud. Ever heard of the 35 A300-600 that are in the fleet of AA? Wink/being sarcastic

Click for large version

Photo © AirNikon

flying lsd · Fri Mar 16, 2001 3:14 pm

With the merger with US airways the number 'll be higher

US airways ordered some years ago 400 A 320 family!

126 orders,and approximatily 150 options and the rest LOI

BelugaBoy · Fri Mar 16, 2001 4:46 pm

Another topic were you proove how you just take your hopes and dreams for the reality.

Never 1 Airbus in the American fleet while they have already 35 ...

They are going to get rid of the A330 without any source to proove it ...

In another toopic you shouted that Lufthansa would NOT buy the A380, now it turns out that they are close to the biggest order yet ( 10+15 ) !

This is just anti-Airbus talk , the reality is that United IS the biggest Airbus customer and will probably stay for some time ( after the merger they have even more Airbus planes and a lot of options ) The fact that they place follow-up orders prooves that they are very satisfied with there Airbus planes.

So why get rid of there A330's while they have a lot of older planes that need replacement before the A330's ?

Guest · Fri Mar 16, 2001 5:07 pm

A lot of errors and confusion in the previous mails...

UAL never ordered any A330s. Northwest did.

UAL is the biggest US Airbus operator, followed by US Air and Northwest. Worldwide Lufthansa is the biggest. Followed by Air France. However UAL has more Airbus
orders than Lufthansa (192 vs 175).

AA ordered 35 A300 but do they still operate them all ????

E.

cedarjet · Fri Mar 16, 2001 5:37 pm

Have UAL announced they're going to get rid of the A330? Is this official or just anti-Airbus nonsense?

Can't believe people are still talking about UAL getting 737NGs!

ptica2000 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 5:44 pm

That is very good news, but I miss A330 orders!

varig md-11 · Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:44 pm

hi
I don't know if AA fly all A300 they ordered,but when you go to MIA you still see quite a number of them around....which the first time I went to MIA surprised me since people talk about AA as an "all american" airline

oh by the way,where are the guys yelling that all airbus customers are nothing but subsidized by the EU to buy the buses???? Wink/being sarcastic

N628AU · Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:59 pm

Don't forget that US has 9 A330 now, with 1 more deferred to 2003, and 20 on option. 30 airplanes is substantial. The only official line from United is that they have not yet been able to evaluate the economics of the A330 to make a decision about it's future SHOULD the merger occur.

The options that US holds can be converted to either -200 series or the A340 should the airline deem they are required.

Guest · Fri Mar 16, 2001 10:19 pm

My two cents...$
1) past week United adds to Airbus fleet with fear that merger with USAirways will not be approved
2) merger not approved
3) USAirways can't get its costs under control...and files for protection...TWA No. 2
4) Airbus 330s sold on world market

See, United Airlines will not fly A330s...there's your proof.

pecoua · Fri Mar 16, 2001 11:50 pm

Being a UA flight attendant, I can tell ya that I won't shed a tear when we retire the last 727. No movie, small overhead bins and just a tired workhorse. The more Airbuses the better. The aisles are wider and the passengers are much more comfortable...and all are video equipped as well. That's important on long flights, especially now that we offer free audio and movies on all flights over 3hrs..except on the 727 and 737-300/500 which are audio equipped only. 737-200 are the only fleet member that do not offer any kind of entertainment...hopefully they will be replaced with the A319s soon.

SegmentKing · Sat Mar 17, 2001 1:43 am

Those are all replacement aircraft, not growth aircraft.

United will probably get the A330, but not expand the fleet of them. There is a REASON they CHOSE the 777 over the A330... DUH!

QantasA3XX · Sat Mar 17, 2001 2:02 am

If i am United Airlines , i consider the A330s to replace some of the Boeing767s ... the B767s are quite old right ?

Smile

deltairlines · Sat Mar 17, 2001 3:18 am

The A330 is to big to replace a 767-200. Honestly, I think UA will pull a BA...have A32X doing the short-medium haul, the 733 and 735 have plenty of life in them still, and use 757 for high-density short haul or low density transcon, and 747, 767, and 777 for TransAtlantic and TransPacific routes.

Jeff

Art at ISP · Sat Mar 17, 2001 3:39 am

For what it's worth, the A330 makes a little sense for UA as a replacement for the 767-222 fleet used on the transcon market. Those airplanes are beat up and worn, and the Airbus in UA seating configuration (I would assume they would have less Envoy and another row of first) would hold around 250 passengers. This would add capacity and also enable UA to cut back on frequency if the economy dictates.

I am sure the 330's were made available at fire sale prices so you might just see them hang around for the transcons. Just my 2 cents worth.

OO-AOG · Sat Mar 17, 2001 3:45 am

Seems that nobody in US wants to see an A330 in United colors. I don't understand this bashing for Airbus products, is it because it's european? I am reading a lot and I've never seen any kind of official statement that US airways A330s will be for sale..so why does these guys like 'Boeing 747-400' always state that 'United will get rid of A330, they don't want them'...?! Ridiculous, I don't understand.
Same thing with the A380. As a real aviation enthousiast I am always happy to see a new aircraft, whatever it's european or american. Why does this A380 gets so much bashing in the States? Is it because it's not a Boeing? Com'on guys, grow up.

cba · Sat Mar 17, 2001 4:57 am

The A330 makes little sense for UA. It is too big to replace their 762's and 763's, which don't need replacing yet anyway. Why are we talking about replacing 10-20 year old 767's when there are 30 year old 727's flying in UAL colors?

UAL has the largest 777 fleet, and the A330 would make no sense for them. The 333 was designed for transatlantic routes, and UAL already has built a strong transatlantic network with their 777's, so the 333 is not needed. My guess is that they will trade them to Boeing for more 777 options.

BA · Sat Mar 17, 2001 8:10 am

Now, don't forget, United was considering ordering some A330s to replace there aging DC-10s on there Hawaiian routes. I haven't heard anything for about 2 years no, so they probably forgot about the plan. However, if the merger does go through, there is a good chance that United will keep them.

Also don't forget, the A330 is not the 777s competitor. The A330 doesn't even have the range of the 777. Even Airbus stated that its a "Medium-Range" aircraft. It was designed to serve highly populated DOMESTIC routes (like the 747-400 Domestic). However, airlines have been using it for trans-atlantic flights.

The 777s true competitor is the A340 which has the range similar to that of the 777.

Now I'm not saying United will DEFINATELY keep them, but don't say that they will NEVER keep them. There is a good change since they have shown interest for the A330 in the past few years.

Guest · Sat Mar 17, 2001 8:19 am

United really has no plans to keep/order the A330s. Just like AA said they wont take the A318s from TWA. I have heard this many times on these forums, and I emailed United about it, and they haven't responded yet. I also talked to a friend of mine who works for United and he says that the company plans to get rid of the A330s. I am not posting Anti-Airbus threads, I am just stating what I have read and heard. Anytime someone says something that is not in favor of Airbus, someone freaks out and says, ANTI-AIRBUS!! BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, YADA, YADA, YADA!

Whatever.

Guest · Sat Mar 17, 2001 8:28 am

OO-AOG,

Ok,friends of mine working for UAL have said it. I may have heard FLY777UAL say it, and it will not do any good in the UAL fleet! A few A330s mixed in with 767s and 777s!?!?! I would like to see one in UA's colors, but it would have to be a dream at this point. United seems to be very satisfied with their fleet of Boeing aircraft, so why switch to Airbus at this point?

widebody · Sat Mar 17, 2001 9:32 am

I dunno much about UAL's widebody fleet, but I take it from the above they operate 747, 777, 767 and DC-10......with narrowbosies, commonality exists between models....A32FAM and 737NG....widebodies however are a different kettle of fish, there is no commonality between any of the widebodies UAL operates, and therefore sticking with an all Boeing widebody fleet is not as watertight as it seems......I am guessing US got their A330's dirt cheap, and now UAL has a ready to go fleet of very cheap A330's........I am guessing UAL is happy with their Airbus narrowbodies, I don't see why there isn't a possibility that UAL may not introduce the A330.......their widebody fleet consists of 4 or 5 stand-alone aircraft.......no reason why one of these can't be changed.......I'm not saying it will or won't, just saying not to write it completely off ....

Rgds..

widebody · Sat Mar 17, 2001 9:35 am

That should read..... "I don't see why there isn't a possibility that UAL may introduce the A330......", not "may not"....

Early Air · Sat Mar 17, 2001 10:01 am

That is not a whole lot. I like the A320 though with UA. However they will only stick with the small planes. The rest will be Boeing. I think this is United last order from Airbus for a while. They did this to get rid of the 727's.

Rgds,
Early Air

Guest · Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:18 pm

<<<"I dunno much about UAL's widebody fleet, but I take it from the above they operate 747, 777, 767 and DC-10......with narrowbosies, commonality exists between models....A32FAM and 737NG....widebodies however are a different kettle of fish, there is no commonality between any of the widebodies UAL operates, and therefore sticking with an all Boeing widebody fleet is not as watertight as it seems......I am guessing US got their A330's dirt cheap, and now UAL has a ready to go fleet of very cheap A330's........I am guessing UAL is happy with their Airbus narrowbodies, I don't see why there isn't a possibility that UAL may not introduce the A330.......their widebody fleet consists of 4 or 5 stand-alone aircraft.......no reason why one of these can't be changed.......I'm not saying it will or won't, just saying not to write it completely off ....

Rgds..">>>

For mega-carriers like UA, commonality between short-haul aircraft, and long-haul aircraft is not a big thing. Anyway, introducing yet another cockpit type into the UA long-haul fleet would complicate things even further. If UA even wanted an aircraft bigger than the 763, and if they were thinking in terms of cockpit commonality, than the 764 would be the way to go, for the fact that a pilot can acheive common rating for the 764 and 777 with an easy transitioning program, and for it's commonality with 762s and 763s. I have also heard a number of times that UA has no interest in the A330. I am only saying what I have heard. Anyway, if UA wanted to, they could change it all around and have the 764 cockpit represent the CRT type 767 cockpit.
-Tom

Guest · Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:25 pm

I agree 300%.

Introducing a new Airbus cockpit to a HUGE fleet of Boeings does complicate things a lot. It would cost the airline more money to get new "stuff" to function the plane into service, and pilots would have to take WAY MORE training. If United wants an A330-size aircraft, the 767-400 is the best way to go.

RayChuang · Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:27 pm

I think UA will sell the A330-300's back to either Airbus or a large leasing company such as CIT, GECAS or ILFC.

The reason is simple: they're too expensive to maintain given the size of the fleet US now has. Besides, UA already have a plane that can fly A333 routes: the 777-200 and 777-200ER. And UA appears to buying as many as 90-120 777's by the time their orders are finished.

United Airline · Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:45 pm

UAL will not be keeping the A 330 I suppose. Why? Coz it is too expensive just to keep 7 of them. Besides, the A 330 is not compatible with the B 777.

Just my 2 cents. Smile

Guest · Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:57 pm

I do think UAL is interested in an A330-type size plane, so, expect some more orders for the 767-400, it is way more omcpatible with the current fleet.

United Airline · Sat Mar 17, 2001 1:04 pm

UAL is interested in the B 767-400ER. The A 330 is far too expensive to operate comparing with the B 767-400ER.

Smile

United Airline · Sat Mar 17, 2001 1:05 pm

UAL is interested in the B 767-400ER. The A 330 is far too expensive to operate comparing with the B 767-400ER.

Smile

DatamanA340 · Sat Mar 17, 2001 1:55 pm

I don't think UA would maintain 330s, but as Cedarjet stated, there is no proof about. Maybe it takes even a year for any determination.

On the other hands, what are these? UA doesn't want 330 because it has 767 and 777? 764 is better because 330 is too expensive to maintain? I will tell you 'prove that'. In a previous thread, some people said '764 is a direct competitor for 332.' (although this statement is somewhat right.) and before long, it's almost perfectly reputed. If UA wants to operate 330, it makes little duplication, with more capacity and range.

Guest · Sat Mar 17, 2001 4:33 pm

The reasons mentioned abve are simple on why the 767-400 is better for United.

The 767-400 would be better in UAL's fleet for these reasons:

1.) Complies with equipment used to serve 767-300s, which saves them a lot of money so they don't have to purchase new things to maintain and service an A330.

2.) Cockpit commonality. The 767-400 cockpit complies with all 767s and also the 777 cockpit. Therefore, United saves even more money on pilot training and familiarization with the aircraft itself.

3.) FA training, the interior of the 767-400 is like the 777. Although it is a little different than the 762/763 cockpit, FA familiarization will cost more for the A330 because FA's would have to go through more weeks of training for the aircraft, which can cost the airline a lot of money.

4.) United's HUGE fleet of all-Boeing aircaft (aside A320), 7 A330s doesn't fit in to well.

5.) For all these extra costs, if they kept them, United will most likely use these aircraft on current 767 routes, therefore, the extra range is not needed. The fuel burn is about the same. The A330 offers very little more capacity and cargo than 764.

Very simple indeed.

An-225 · Sat Mar 17, 2001 4:50 pm

Let's just wait and see...

N628AU · Sat Mar 17, 2001 5:48 pm

UnitedAirline....

Just FYI, it is 9 A-330, with 1 more due in 2003, and 20 on option. Not 7.

Croupier....

With all the mistakes US made in it's past (shrinking to try to be profitable, old aircraft, no intl route structure, botched merger intergration, bad PR due to accidents, surly employees, dirty and late aircraft), they have never filed for bankruptcy, and have about $1 billion in cash in the bank. They now have a solid foundation to build from. What on earth makes you think they will be TWA #2 all of a sudden? Continental, for one, was in much worse shape previously than US is now.

Joona · Sat Mar 17, 2001 11:14 pm

I fully agrae with you. I like both Airbus and Boeing. Both companies have their goods and bads. Both companies make good and bad aircraft, there simply isn't one better than another.

I continue to say what I have always said:

You can fight forever which one is better, A or B, but McDonnell Douglas is always the best. A and B have no chances against MDD.

Joona

Guest · Sun Mar 18, 2001 12:50 am

My thought is that United will keep the inherited US Airways A330-300s which are powered by same P&W 4000 series engines like the rest of their wide-body fleet, plus it has the same or greater passenger capacity as the new 767-400 to use on routes from the West Coast to Hawaii. If they use them for awhile on some of their routes instead of selling them off right away they will realize what a terrific aircraft it is.

KALB · Sun Mar 18, 2001 1:42 am

You can't prove the future. You have rendered an opinion based on your assessment of UA's future needs. Facts and past events .are the only things that can be proved.

747-451 · Sun Mar 18, 2001 3:21 am

United loves the A320 family and they are excellent aircraft. I do think they will dump the A330's since it isn't worth the costs as Boeing747-400 states. Their continuing love affair with Boeing will continue except for more A320 series and perhaps a few A380's.

ampropilot2b · Sun Mar 18, 2001 3:32 am

I really think United will be looking to simplify their fleet soon, whether the US deal goes through or not. While having just a few planes that don't fit in is OK, United will have too many different types of airplanes, with too many engine configurations. While fleet commonality isn't the most important consideration, the expense adds up when you have a fleet of about 1000planes (after US deal). Delta, CO, and AA are moving quickly towards fleet commonality, with 737s, 757s, 767s and 777s (possibly 717s at AA Smile

). With only four types, their maintanance costs, training costs, and overall operating costs will be substantially lower than United's. Higher costs, higher fares, less passengers, lower profits...etc....etc....etc...

Don't get me wrong, United is my favorite airline, but as they are saying right now...they need to cut costs, and fleet commonality would go a long way in doing that. I hope and suspect they have some plans up their sleeves for how to do this.

Guest · Sun Mar 18, 2001 5:11 am

I think United will go for the 747X Stretch for the same reasons I mentioned above, just comparing with A380. United knows that adding a huge Airbus aircraft would cost SO much more than adding a huge Boeing aircaft. The 747X Stretch offers just about the same capacity and will serve United just as good as A380. That's my view.

tupolev154b2 · Sun Mar 18, 2001 5:20 am

Well the A380 will have better operating economics, but then again we don't know yet since look at what happened to the MD-11. Boeing747-400, I'm pretty sure that you were really thinking 10 years ago that United would be going for the 737-400 instead of the A320 then because they already operate the 737-300 and -500. Then look what happened...

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net