One more thing......

I don't think AA will keep the A318s. How about you?

There's another topic about this: they've already cancelled the A318 / A319 order.

The TWA/US 757 swap sounds good, but aren't TWA 75s a lot newer than US's. I think all of TWAs are five years old at most. How old are USs'?

Some of the US Airways 757s are ex-Eastern Airlines planes that were purchased before the airline went bankrupt.

I made the idea of the 'swap' of the B 757 but that guy typed it as B 737 instead.

The newer ones should be swapped.........  

Anyway, TWA's B 757s are quite new. They are about 5 years old only. For US Airway's B 757s, some of the them are indeed from Eastern Airlines.

 

Actually, some of the B 757s can be used to replace UAL's B 727s. Some of them but not all.............

 

What do you guys think about the 'Swap' idea?

One more thing......

Last, but not the least......

I strongly believe that the A 321/A330/MD80 will leave. However, why can't UAL form a company and have them leased out? It would be a waste for UAL to sell them immediately.

About the 'swap' idea, I think they should do it with the newer B 757s, if possible. Give UAL the P&W Powered B 757s and give AA the RR powered ones.

Additional B 757s can be ordered to cover the need for future expansion since the B 757 is a VERY reliable plane.

What do you guys think?

 

United Airline,

United already does airplane leasing. Also, accoring to my sources, the MD-80s are going to AA too.

ILUV767:


Sounds cool! Will the MD80s be sold or leased to AA?

The A 330s as well as the A 321s should be leased out externally. That would be a good idea.

 



Best wishes:
Des

I have been told by a very good source, that UAL not only inteds to operate the US A333, but to order more for transcon flights and flights to Hawaii.

Very good news indeed!!!!

Oh seriously? Where did you get that from?

I am sure UAL is committed to an all-Boeing fleet of planes that are as big as or larger than the B 757.

Why not order more B 777-200ERs? Or even the B 767-400ER?

I have been told by a very good source, that UAL not only inteds to operate the US A333, but to order more for transcon flights and flights to Hawaii.

Very good news indeed!!!!

Gerardo, do you expect anyone to believe that, especially when there have been so many rumors coming from mangement that they have no interest in the plane? Come on!
Hey everyone! Breaking news! Cathay Pacific to return A330s for 767s! (That's just how bad it sounds)
-Tom

King767

Can you take the time to detail and -substantiate- these "rumors from management" that they intend to dump the A330 (or other Airbus equipment inherited from the US merger)?

I think everyone would be quite interested to see the details of UAL's long and short term strategic fleet planning (post US merger).

I'm quite curious...

MAC

King767:


I agree too! It's just like CX going to order the B 767-400ER.

 


Des

Hey, King767, if you believe all those "UAL is selling the A333 right away and nobody needs the A380"-experts, why don't you believe me?

I have the same proves, as all others here, which are (guess what)  

Gerardo

United Airline, I am going to ask your own question to you:

Oh seriously? Where did you get that from?
I am sure UAL is committed to an all-Boeing fleet of planes that are as big as or larger than the B 757

My question is: Oh seriously? Where did you get that from?

Hey everyone! Breaking news! Cathay Pacific to return A330s for 767s! (That's just how bad it sounds)
-Tom

Sounds cool.      

Oh............... Has UAL ordered a single Airbus Widebody? NO!

Would it be cost effective to operate B767, B777 as well as A 330 at the same time? NO!

Hope that answers your question.  

Anyway, let's see.

United Airline:

The fact that UAL has never ordered an Airbus widebody doesn't mean anything. There's always a first time...
Remember 6 months ago Qantas had never ordered ANYTHING from Airbus...
Do not for a second believe that United hasn't seriously looked into Airbus widebodies in the past. And they'll do it again. Loyalty to a certain manufacturer doesn't mean anything in this business.
Mind you, i'm not saying they're going to keep the A330s and are going to order the A380, I however would not just rule it out with that 'they're commited to an all Boeing fleet for anything bigger or equal to 757' joke.

The A320 series is a wonderful airplane which many US Airways pilots and UA pilots are very pleased with. Recently I was able to fly an A320 simulator. I was able to fly it with little trouble, although landing was a little tricky. I also programed a real one for a flight to Pittsburgh with the watchful eye of a captain on me. I have always loved boeing, but the A320 is a very strong airplane witch will undoubtedly be very successful in the United States. With such a wonderful Airplane I think US Airways and UA will follow the most logical and economical path for now.....Airbus

Would it be cost effective to operate B767, B777 as well as A 330 at the same time? NO!

Then why is it a good idea for CX to operate A340-300, B747-400, A340-600 AND the 777-200/300ER (with CE engines only) at the same time as you have suggested?

The A330 would do very well for transcon and flights to hawaii for its ability to carry mucho premium seats and ability to carry a massive amount of cargo (esp. important for Hawaii), respectively.

For CX, they already flying the B777-200/300. So why not add the ER version as well?

UAL has never flown an A 330 before. And they never will. They better off getting the B 767-400ER which is compatible to their B 767-300ER fleet.  

UAL has never flown an A 330 before. And they never will

United Airline, if I ever see an A330 in United's fleet I am fully expecting you to eat my worn out smelly jogging shoe.  

'UAL has never flown an A 330 before'

true, but US has...
And it's US they'll be taking over. With US they'll be taking over Us' personnel, which is used to the A330.

The thing is they'll have to keep 'em for a while at least, because they can't just replace 10 A330 in a single day (unless they have some 777s stacked away is some secret closet ). I think they'll use that time to carefully evaluate the A330's performance, and then they'll decide whether to keep them or not..

CPDC10-30, You could spice up this jogging shoe with some socks, of course used for 2 or 3 months without washing  

Regards
Gerardo

King767

Can you take the time to detail and -substantiate- these "rumors from management" that they intend to dump the A330 (or other Airbus equipment inherited from the US merger)?

I think everyone would be quite interested to see the details of UAL's long and short term strategic fleet planning (post US merger).

I'm quite curious...

This is what I mean, you say one harmless thing and you have these guys going crazy on you. MAC, you should not be so quick to criticize. Re-read my post, did I say that UA will right away dump the US inherited A330s? No. Infact, I would not be suprised if UA operated these aircraft for a bit before selling or leasing them out. As for the rumors, why don't you go and have a talk with anyone who works for UA, and they will probably tell you the same thing. Hey, MAC, I don't see you asking about Gerardos "Very good" source. Why is that? I think we know why. And hey pal, do I look like UAs CEO? These are things I have heard, now why don't you just chill for a bit, and stop going off your rocker.

Hey, King767, if you believe all those "UAL is selling the A333 right away and nobody needs the A380"-experts, why don't you believe me?

I have the same proves, as all others here, which are (guess what)

Gerardo, again, I never said that UA is right away going to get rid of the A330s. What shocked me in your statement was that UA will order more A330s. This has been discussed to death, and why dosent everyone just think what they think, and not have another 100+ thread again. Gerardo, I don't think you have such a position to be saying who I believe either.
-Tom

United Airline wrote:


Oh............... Has UAL ordered a single Airbus Widebody? NO!

Would it be cost effective to operate B767, B777 as well as A 330 at the same time? NO!

Hope that answers your question.  

Anyway, let's see.


Actually United Airline, United owns some airbus widebodies already. They are leased out to Air Canada.
Also...United Airline, let me tell you something about the airline industry....that is, nothing is for certain, and to expect the unexpected. For all we know, Delta may order the A330 or A340, and United may order the A330. Northwest may order 777s. You never know. The bottom line is that United will operate planes that it needs...no matter who the manufacturer is. An airline that is as large as United really doesnt give a rats ass about total commonality...smaller airlines do.

King767

You just illustrated the "look before you leap" tendencies that us fact-starved aviation fans are -dying to avoid- when it comes to discussion of a topic like this. You went ahead and shot off your mouth (in type form) assuming there was something else at issue when all it was doing was asking you for facts and sources of your facts. For the purposes of the debate, you completely missed the request and in one turn, you assumed something else.

All I asked was for *your sources* and could you could kindly list them here?

As Agent Joe Friday said "Just the Facts..maam". That's what we'd all like to see. Is that asking too much?

Best Regards from -Your Pal-  

MAC

I still can't believe how big this topic is!!!

Keep it going! Let's make 200 replies!!

-Shawn

King767

You just illustrated the "look before you leap" tendencies that us fact-starved aviation fans are -dying to avoid- when it comes to discussion of a topic like this. You went ahead and shot off your mouth (in type form) assuming there was something else at issue when all it was doing was asking you for facts and sources of your facts. For the purposes of the debate, you completely missed the request and in one turn, you assumed something else.

All I asked was for *your sources* and could you could kindly list them here?

As Agent Joe Friday said "Just the Facts..maam". That's what we'd all like to see. Is that asking too much?

Arent we twisting words here. I illustrated the "look before you leap" method? Thats funny. I know what I will do, each flight I go on I will bring a big notebook with lots of paper, and I will ask the whole crew for all their info, and do a complete background check, and post on this board.
"Capt. Smith, can I have your DOB, SS #, address, place of birth, credit card numbers, etc."
Come on!

You are really twisting this. One who is debating on lets say an aircraft's performance, or an airlines order for an aircraft is responsible to bring up facts. What I stated are statements that have been circulating around for awhile. Is it true? Well it came from a UA A320 FO on my way to DEN last year.

You went ahead and shot off your mouth (in type form) assuming there was something else at issue when all it was doing was asking you for facts and sources of your facts. For the purposes of the debate, you completely missed the request and in one turn, you assumed something else.

Trying to save Gerardos ass? I still would like to see his "Very good" source, which supposively knows that UA "Will be ordering more A330s". MAC, it is not I who should be getting harassed here, it is Gerardo, not a single fact for such a huge statement. Still, that statement made no sense what so ever.
-Tom

"For CX, they already flying the B777-200/300. So why not add the ER version as well?" UAL has never flown an A 330 before. And they never will. They better off getting the B 767-400ER which is compatible to their B 767-300ER fleet.

Well, I suppose an order for a few Hindenburg Zeppelins are part of the equation as well?..just kidding.

Look. For every argument you make for the 767-400, an equal, if not better argument could be made for the A330-300 at UAL.

Here are just three of them:

1.) UAL has a large A32X fleet, something which the A330 can take advantage of with it's CCQ capabilities.

2.) The A333 can haul -more- cargo than the 767-400.

3.) The PW4000 engines already hung on the US A330's make for ease of maintenance with UAL's huge PW4000 'fleet'.

Why is it the 767-400 is having such a difficult time?

Could it be there is a somewhat puzzling picture Boeing has created in recent years too?

Some of the decisions it's made in recent years, from it's tardy reply to the A320, the attack mode on/off flip-flop on viability of a VLA, the move of the Seattle headquarters, shifting of narrowbody 757 production to Wichita, layoffs numbering over 40K, outsourcing the 747X wings to Japan (and torquing off Boeing employees at home) to now a potential -changing of mind- on 747X to begin with..and possibly shifting effort to building a new generation of 250 seaters (which would be a neat thing to see I might add).

Has you head begun to spin yet? Mine has.

Seriously though it points to a slightly confused operating picture. It's no wonder some airlines could very well be waiting Boeing out before commiting to a large purchase of jets like the 764 due to issues with the airplane itself, but maybe more importantly, the company making it.

Just my candid views and opinions, twinged with a taste and sincere yearning for that wonderful word called -fact-. Oh where oh where is it?

Regards
MAC

What I stated are statements that have been circulating around for awhile. Is it true? Well it came from a UA A320 FO on my way to DEN last year.

Thank you for posting that, that's all I was asking for.

Regards
MAC

Oh god, I thouh we were over this!
They both have their advantages, but MAC, you have to admit it sometimes. (You know what im saying)


1.) UAL has a large A32X fleet, something which the A330 can take advantage of with it's CCQ capabilities.

UAL has an even larger 757/767/777 fleet, which the 767 benefit's from these aircraft through commonality.

2.) The A333 can haul -more- cargo than the 767-400.

MAC, this has been stated over and over, US airlines do not have such a need for cargo as smaller national carriers do, therefore the 767 provides sufficient cargo space, especially for the trans-con market.


3.) The PW4000 engines already hung on the US A330's make for ease of maintenance with UAL's huge PW4000 'fleet'.

All 767 series aircraft are available with the P+W4000 series engine. (Come on, that was a bad one  )

Also, heres one for the 767, it is more suitable for the demanding trans-con market, since it is a lighter, more flexible aircraft.

Why is it the 767-400 is having such a difficult time?

Could it be there is a somewhat puzzling picture Boeing has created in recent years too?

Some of the decisions it's made in recent years, from it's tardy reply to the A320, the attack mode on/off flip-flop on viability of a VLA, the move of the Seattle headquarters, shifting of narrowbody 757 production to Wichita, layoffs numbering over 40K, outsourcing the 747X wings to Japan (and torquing off Boeing employees at home) to now a potential -changing of mind- on 747X to begin with..and possibly shifting effort to building a new generation of 250 seaters (which would be a neat thing to see I might add).

Has you head begun to spin yet? Mine has.

Seriously though it points to a slightly confused operating picture. It's no wonder some airlines could very well be waiting Boeing out before commiting to a large purchase of jets like the 764 due to issues with the airplane itself, but maybe more importantly, the company making it.

Just my candid views and opinions, twinged with a taste and sincere yearning for that wonderful word called -fact-. Oh where oh where is it?

A very biased, close minded view I might add. How in on earth is that related to the 764s "problems" (Which really don't exist if you think about it). "Airlines waiting Boeing out before commiting to a large purchase of jets like the 764 due to issues with the airplane ifself"-what is this a big game or something? MAC, mabye if you knew more about this wonderful airplane, and opened your mind you would really understand.
-Tom

Folks,

Some here would really like to see UAL's "loyalty to Boeing" continue. Granted there are many reasons for this. But I ask for those who think that way to take a look into the real world of business today and see if it applies in a global economy. How pragmatic is that?

A thread on the Airbus E-group I subscribe to clarified something that really speaks volumes. Loyalty means nothing anymore. That means suppliers of aircraft to engine powerplants, etc. If you can prove your product will do the job, be cheaper to buy and operate, and acquire said product quicker, who do you think will get the business? Leave all loyalties aside in answering that.

The one with the right product, doing the job, at the right price at the right time?
Or the product built at Brand Y because you've always "bought from Brand Y".

Think on that.

"Paradigm shifts" have happened in almost every industry on a mass scale. The most recent one in the US was the Japanese auto industry's movement into the American market during the late 70s/early 80s.

Loyalties to the Big Three automakers then shriveled after the US market saw and liked the cheaper to buy and operate, high quality, Japanese automobiles at a time of high fuel costs and recession. Chrysler had to be bailed out and built "K-Cars" to reply (The K-Car saved Chrysler BTW). Ford/Lincoln/Mercury was stuck between behemoth cars that guzzled gas to building cars that sipped gas at half the size. GM was in the same boat too. AMC faded away into Chrysler.

Loyalty is a nice concept to adore, and feel warm and fuzzy inside about, but if it cant help you pay your bills or help you make money to stay or grow in business, then what place does it hold in importance?

What is loyalty's utility?
What is loyalty's true purpose from a business perspective? (Otherwise known as -The Bottom Line-)

The same paradigm shift has happened with Airbus and Boeing. Airbus was long before only known in a few parts of the world, as Nissan, Datsun and Toyota were not long before 1980. Now look what has happened, Airbus is now on almost on an equal sales footing with Boeing(even surpassing Boeing in 1999). That's -truly- a remarkable feat to have been accomplished.

Just some idle ramblings I thought I'd share. This sort of discussion offers a good time to offer some perspective on "why" things go the way they do and why the idea of keeping aware of paradigm shifts (not fighting them) and how they occur are quite relevant.

Regards
MAC

The P&W 4000 series engines hung on the wings of an A330 have more thrust (68,000lbs) than the ones under the wings of a 767-300/400 (60,000lbs).

The P&W 4000 series engines hung on the wings of an A330 have more thrust (68,000lbs) than the ones under the wings of a 767-300/400 (60,000lbs).

Wow, TEDSKI, what an intelligent statement. I bet you are smarter than the fish in my tank! Just what is your point in posting this. Actually the max rating for the 4000s on the 764ER is 63,500lbs, not 60,000lbs.
-Tom

What a bizarre thread. It started out about UA buying A32Xs and has rambled on for ages about every type developed since the 707.

Boeing 747 400, you were in trouble when United_Airline started agreeing with you.

In general, most of this thread shows the weakness of this site, opinions being taken as rumors being taken as facts, biased opinions stifling reasoned arguments and a mistaken belief that whatever happens in the USA is mirrorred exactly everywhere else in the world.

...Have to admit it was entertaining reading though!!

Tullamarine

What a bizarre thread. It started out about UA buying A32Xs and has rambled on for ages about every type developed since the 707.

Boeing 747 400, you were in trouble when United_Airline started agreeing with you.

In general, most of this thread shows the weakness of this site, opinions being taken as rumors being taken as facts, biased opinions stifling reasoned arguments and a mistaken belief that whatever happens in the USA is mirrorred exactly everywhere else in the world.

...Have to admit it was entertaining reading though!!

You've nailed it right there...the last paragraph in particular.

If one were to try and use the US model of airline ops in Japan or Europe, one would be laughed out of the respective government regulatory offices, if not the country en toto. It does explain the "cultural imperialism" that does exist, whereby some seem to automatically believe everything there is exactly like -here- mentality. Chalk it up to age and experience...(ignorance? (G)...maybe. (G)

I've wondered if there ought to be an Airliners.Net "Bullshit Forum" where nothing but complete, unadulterated bullshit is posted. To be clean of course, Johan could call it the "Mad Cow" Forum. (LOL!)

Regards
MAC

Tullamarine, you must be the type of person who thinks younger people have no right to be here. United Airline may not know as much about the whole aviation industry as some of us do, but he has a right to express his views without you idiots making fun of him! You think he is acting young? Look at you guys making fun of him! Now who looks like they're acting young?! I support him 100%, he has just as much a right stating his views as you do Tullamarine, you're no better than him.

Boeing 747-400

I dont think it's much an issue of a right to post, no-one would question that, but with that responsibility, one should post with a sense of brains behind them too.

The anonymity of the Internet doesnt expose us to the personality or age of the persons engaged as easy as it is in "real life", hence, the greater responsibility one has to -know- what you are posting about and have a sense of give and take in the topic of debate, having a sense of humor of course helps, and not getting worked up about someone who disagrees with you. It appears you are affected by the post made, but try to have a sense of humour about things and then begin to take responsibility for what is being said and why. Not the emotive side first.

If you post with facts in a text basis, one cannot understand the emotional impact they have because frankly, this is a black and white world of text posted here. Again, this means -taking responsibility- for what one posts and knowing what they post beforehand. Knowing what the impact might be. And dealign with it afterwards. That's called -life-.

This cannot become an "online sensitivity awareness program". This is a forum where people come to post their views and -take responsibility for what they post too-.

Just my two cents..from an online guy whose been 'connected' since 1989. (G)

Regards
MAC

Boeing 747-400, thats sour grapes if you ask me. I can't be much older than United Airline. Tullamarine is directing comments to people making silly comments. If someone makes silly comments like "UAL will buy the 737NG" and "UAL will only buy Boeing aircraft for sizes larger than the 757" we have a right to counter them.

I have nothing against the guy personally, but a lot of the stuff he posts is completely unfounded rumours and speculation posted with a biased anti-Airbus viewpoint.

ILUV767:

I know that UAL owns a few Airbus Widebodies, but they never operated them actually.


Boeing747-400:

Thank's so much for your support. I been an aviation enthusiast since I was five. And I am sure my knowledge in the industry is NO less than anyone here.

Actually I believe that everyone has a right to express his/her opinion. Many of my statements are what I think/believe.

In fact, many members here type crap from time to time.

Once again, thank you so much!


Best wishes:
Des

P.S: Besides, if I say 'I like Boeing' or 'I am a Boeing fan', does that mean that I hate Airbus? No.

MAC_Veteran.......

You are so right on!

You've been added to my Respected Users list for your awesome posts!

Gosh this is entertaining.

It's a bit like the BA/A330 debate which I have heard is raging within the company - do they get some for the European routes to replace the 767s (which could be sold to the Royal Air Force to fulfill the strategic tanker requirement). Hell, BA did it to DHL with the 757s....

And King767, be very wary about what pilots tell you...they are usually the last to know about management decisions...he was probably an FO trying to impress you...!

WOW! This topic certainly has sparked a heated response! OK, I'll through my two cents in.

I think eventually, United will end up with an Airbus narrow body fleet, and Boeing widebody fleet. Loyalty is a very rare thing in the airline industry, however I believe if any airline out there is capable of launching the 747X, it's United. If they do, I actually see them launching the non-stretch aircraft first. But, they may want the capacity capabilities of the A380. This competition is very much up in the air.

Responding to the 764 debate, I don't see United acquiring them either. As everyone knows, the 764 was intended to be a DC-10/L-1011. United acquired the 777 as thier DC-10 replacement from the start. I don't see them acquiring two aircraft for the same job. Then again, they also have A319's and 733's. They have the same capacities, so who knows?

As far as the A330's go, I personally don't see it happening. That is simply an opinion. Once again, it would be two aircraft with the same capabilities. But then again, United is doing that already. That's just a gut feeling. However, as a friend once told me, that gut feeling could be indigestion.

Regards

P.S. Let's get the response count to 200 all!!!

And King767, be very wary about what pilots tell you...they are usually the last to know about management decisions...he was probably an FO trying to impress you...!

FO trying to impress me? What are you talking about? I think they more knowleged about this subject than any of us here. Anyway, anyone with the least bit of common sense see that further A330s with UA are not happening.
-Tom

Boeing nut,

You are absolutely correct!  

I think Boeing will be commited to buying as many A319/A320 planes as they can get--these will completely replace their 727-200 fleet in a couple of years. If UA does merge with US, don't be surprised that UA buys a lot more A320's for the BOS-LGA-DCA shuttle service.

However, don't expect the 737-300/500 fleet to leave anytime soon--they were bought in the late 1980's/early 1990's. Now mostly committed to the United Shuttle operation on the West Coast, these will continue to operate (they may get re-engined after 2006) until at least 2015.

As for the larger planes, if UA merges with US, the A330-300's are going, and the A321's may be going, too. UA will definitely keep its 757-200 fleet going, do a major upgrade of its 767-200/300 fleet, and very likely buy more 777-200ER's. The 747-400 fleet will likely have major interior upgrades, cockpit upgrades and possibly engine upgrades probably starting in 2006, which will keep them flying till 2015.

As for VLA's, UA is still undecided at this time. UA could buy the A380-800R in a few years, or patiently wait for the Boeing Blended-Wing Body (BWB) flying wing after 2013.

After all the B 727s have retired, I doubt they will go for more A 319/320s for some time. They already have enough. What they should do is to order more B 757-200. Or order the B 757-300 in increase capacity.  

For the VLA, I strongly doubt that they will go for the A 380. However, I do expect them to order the B 747-400LR (For Asian & Australian Routes) as well as the B 747X Stretch for their Asian routes. They need the range as well as the capacity!

For the BWB, do expect them to go for some when Boeing launches them in the future. In fact, they may become the launch customer.  

Just my 2 cents.

United,

"For the BWB, do expect them to go for some when Boeing launches them in the future. In fact, they may become the launch customer"

Why?